2012/3/10 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>> But then I would have to map all language-specific error reports to some
>> SQL error scheme, which is not only cumbersome but pretty useless. For
>> example, a Python programmer will be familiar with the typical output
>> that pylint produces and how to fix it. If we hide that output behind
>> the layer of SQL-ness, that won't make things easier to anyone.
>
> Yeah, this is a good point. I'm willing to concede that we are not
> close to having a uniform API that could be used for checker functions,
> so maybe what we should do for now is just invent
> plpgsql_check_function(regprocedure). I'd still like to see the
> question revisited sometime in the future, but it would be appropriate
> to have a few working examples of popular checker functions for
> different languages before we try to invent a common API.
ok, I'll prepare patch
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
