Re: mapping object names to role IDs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: mapping object names to role IDs
Date
Msg-id 14617.1274627437@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: mapping object names to role IDs  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: mapping object names to role IDs
List pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Long story short, this is kind of a mess.

> ... I think it would be good to have a
> consistant naming/calling scheme for these various functions, but I'm
> not sure that moving them all to the same place makes sense.

I'm with Stephen on this one.  I agree that standardizing the function
names and behavior would be a good idea, but don't try to put them all
in one place.

BTW, the plain-name cases should be "const char *", else some callers
will have to cast away const.  You could possibly make an argument for
"const List *" in the qualified-name cases, but we don't do that
anywhere else so I think it'd just look funny here (and would require
internally casting away const, too).
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: mapping object names to role IDs
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: mapping object names to role IDs