> Is there a sound reason to believe that pl/Ruby does not have the
> trusted/untrusted issue ?
Sure... it hasn't been found. We can play the it "might have" or "might
not have" game all day long but it won't get us anywhere. Today, and
yesterday pl/Ruby can be run trust/untrusted, pl/python can not.
>>Ruby for good or bad is gaining a large following and has become a very
>>active language in a short period of time. It can also be trusted and
>>untrusted.
>
>
> Both of these things could be said about Python when it was about the
> same age Ruby is now.
But they can't be said about Python now. Again I love Python but I can't
use it the way I want to in the database.
>>I believe that unless plPython can either be fixed
>
>
> Fixed how ?
Be able to be trusted.
>
>
>>or is going to continue to move forward as a pl language
>
>
> Why is "movin forward" needed ?
Why do we need air to breathe? It is all about usability. The plPython
feature set it quickly becoming obsolete by the other language that are
in and not in core. Heck plPHP as scary as that is can do more.
>>
>>that we should consider deprecating it and even removing it in 8.2 or 8.3.
>
>
> This argument reminds me of the "let's rewrite postgresql in C++"
> proposal that comes up every few months.
Your kidding right? I am not suggesting anything remotely close to that
insane argument. All I am saying is that unless plPython can be made to
be trust I think it should be deprecated.
And no, doing a follow up with "Well, plC can't be trusted" isn't going
to work. C is a completely different beast then the other pl languages.
In replacement or addition to, I think that plRuby would be a good choice.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/
