Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more)
Date
Msg-id 10818.974423190@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more)  (Nathan Myers <ncm@zembu.com>)
Responses Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more)  (Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>)
Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more)  (Marko Kreen <marko@l-t.ee>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nathan Myers <ncm@zembu.com> writes:
>  - Keep the name 'C' for both old-style and new-style module declarations.
>  - Require that new-style modules define a distinguished symbol, such as 
>    "int __postgresql_call_7_1;".

I was thinking along the same lines myself.  I'd want to do it on a
per-function basis, though, rather than assuming that all functions in
a module must use the same interface.

I'd be inclined to define a macro that creates the signal object,
so that you'd write something like

PG_FUNCTION_API_V2(foo);

Datum
foo(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
{...
}

to create a dynamically loadable new-style function.

Comments?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Varchar standard compliance
Next
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more)