On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 05:49:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I presume that Ian is not thinking about such a scenario, but only about
> using %type in a schema file that he will reload into a freshly created
> database each time he edits it. That avoids the issue of whether %type
> declarations can or should track changes on the fly, but I think he's
> still going to run into problems with function naming: do
> fooey(foo.bar%type) and fooey(foo.baz%type) conflict, or not? Maybe
> today the schema works and tomorrow you get an error.
How about a feature in psql which would read something like '%type' and
convert it to the appropriate thing before it passed it to the backend?
Then you could use it without thinking about it in a script which you
would \i into psql. That would do what's wanted here without having
any backend nasties. I'm not offering to implement it myself - at least
not right now - but does it seem like a sensible idea?
Richard
