Thread: AW: AW: AW: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function language nam esh

> But we have very few Informix functions moving to PostgreSQL.

I do not understand this comment.
What you imho forget here is that a definition for an interface will eventually be
included in the SQL standard. 
And it will be what Oracle or DB/2 (maybe even Informix) does.

I conclude from previous mails, that none of us have the slightest idea
how this works in DB/2 or Oracle. This is imho bad.

> My concern is that this is confusing. All our documentation says the
> style is called C.  Functions are confusing enough.  Adding a new name
> for our default function type could add to the confusion.

Yes, that is why imho some more research and adjustments are necessary 
before we make this the new default interface, and postpone public advertisement 
to 7.2.

Andreas

[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> 
> > But we have very few Informix functions moving to PostgreSQL.
> 
> I do not understand this comment.
> What you imho forget here is that a definition for an interface will eventually be
> included in the SQL standard. 
> And it will be what Oracle or DB/2 (maybe even Informix) does.

OK, lets call the old style "stdC" and the new one "C".


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 

Bruce Momjian writes:

> OK, lets call the old style "stdC" and the new one "C".

The old style has the be 'C' because otherwise you break every old script,
including dumps for upgrades, and Lamar will *really* be on your case this
time. ;-)

Also, the grammar clause "LANGUAGE C" is actually part of the standard, so
naming it "LANGUAGE stdC" will make it *less* standard.  (Not that I buy
Informix as being a "standard".)

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/