Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>>> 4. Syntax must be as closer as plpgsql (declaration, assingment etc)
>>> rather than any syntax that we have to learn :-)
>>>
>> PostgreSQL support other languages than PL/pgSQL. We need universal syntax
>> for plperl and others too
>>
>
> Why? Don't those other languages have support of their own for this?
>
> If we try and make this completely cross-language I fear we'll end up
> with something so watered down and obtuse that it'll be useless. I think
> it makes much more sense to design something for plpgsql and only
> commonize whatever it makes sense to.
>
plperl and pltcl at least have support for now for shared non-table
session data. The trouble is that it is shared ONLY inside the
interpreter. That means there is no sharing between, say, a plperl func
and a pltcl func. Now it would make far more sense if session objects
could be shared between interpreters, especially if they are namespace
scoped. So I think you need to give a good reason for NOT sharing.
cheers
andrew
