AW: AW: AW: AW: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function lang uage nam esh - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas SB
Subject AW: AW: AW: AW: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function lang uage nam esh
Date
Msg-id 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368122@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-hackers
> Also, the grammar clause "LANGUAGE C" is actually part of the standard, so
> naming it "LANGUAGE stdC" will make it *less* standard.  (Not that I buy
> Informix as being a "standard".)

I only quoted Informix, because it is the only one where I know how it works.
It might even be, that the Oracle and DB/2 interface is also similar to our "oldC",
I simply don't know.

The fact, that part of this is already in the standard (like "language c") makes me 
even more firm in my opinion, that more research is needed before advertising "newC".

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB
Date:
Subject: AW: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam ( xact.c xlog.c)
Next
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: AW: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function language namesh