Tom Lane wrote:
Applied with some editorializing. In particular, I don't believe the
original did the right thing with (a - (b - c)).
Oops, missed that case...
But now, we have (a + ( b + c)) again.
A patch that removes parentheses for + and * is appended.
Regards,
Andfdsa
Now the patch is *really* appended :-)
Tom Lane wrote:
Applied with some editorializing. In particular, I don't believe the
original did the right thing with (a - (b - c)).
Oops, missed that case...
But now, we have (a + ( b + c)) again.
A patch that removes parentheses for + and * is
Tom Lane wrote:
Now the patch is *really* appended :-)
And rejected.
Ok, the ckeck for node being the first child already does the trick for
standard l-t-r evaluation.
You cannot assume that an operator is commutative or
associative just because it has a name you think ought to be.
(For
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I didn't like the functions ending in _ext. I renamed them to _pp for
pretty print. Patch attached and applied.
Seems to be shy a catversion bump; since you have just made an
incompatible change in the internal-function-names
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, to me it's not well-known that floating-point addition is not
associative, do I need to re-learn my math?
regression=# select (1.0::float8 + (-1.0::float8)) + 1.0e-20::float8;
?column?
--
1e-20
(1 row)
regression=# select 1.0::float8
Would you send over the patch --- it was missing.
---
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Applied with some editorializing. In particular, I don't believe the
original did the right thing with (a - (b - c)).
I didn't like the functions ending in _ext. I renamed them to _pp for
pretty print. Patch attached and applied.
---
Tom Lane wrote:
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I recoded the stuff as Tom recommended,
Patch applied, modified by Tom and myself.
---
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andreas, looks good, but I need a diff -c, context diff.
Hi Bruce,
I intentionally only attached only non-context diffs
Tom Lane wrote:
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+ int prettyFlags = !PG_ARGISNULL(1) PG_GETARG_BOOL(1) ? PRETTYFLAG_PAREN|PRETTYFLAG_INDENT : 0;
Since the pg_proc entries are all marked strict, it's unnecessary for
you to write any ARGISNULL checks.
Yeah you're
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are these illustrating a problem with the function definition, or is it
happening because it is the first time we are calling the same function
with one and more than one parameter?
The function definition is broken. While it could
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom, how do I pass PG_FUNCTION_ARGS to another function, while adding a
new parameter?
I wouldn't. Do the PG_GETARGS in the wrapper, and have the called
function take a normal C parameter list.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom, how do I pass PG_FUNCTION_ARGS to another function, while adding a
new parameter?
I wouldn't. Do the PG_GETARGS in the wrapper, and have the called
function take a normal C parameter list.
So I need to wrappers for each
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom, how do I pass PG_FUNCTION_ARGS to another function, while adding a
new parameter?
I wouldn't. Do the PG_GETARGS in the wrapper, and have the called
function take a normal C parameter list.
So I
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Bruce Momjian
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andreas, looks good, but I need a diff -c, context diff.
Hi Bruce,
I intentionally only attached only non-context diffs because the patch
is about 50 % size of the original file. Now, here's the same as context
diff.
I understand. I
Hi Bruce,
so here's the complete patch against the current cvs.
Description:
The attached patches will add
pg_get_ruledef(oid, bool)
pg_get_viewdef(text, bool)
pg_get_viewdef(oid, bool)
pg_get_indexdef(oid, int4, bool)
pg_get_constraintdef(oid, bool)
pg_get_expr(text, oid, bool)
If the
Andreas, looks good, but I need a diff -c, context diff.
---
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Hi Bruce,
so here's the complete patch against the current cvs.
Description:
The attached patches will add
pg_get_ruledef(oid,
17 matches
Mail list logo
