RE: When malloc returns zero ...
Hiroshi Inoue <inoue@tpf.co.jp>
From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: "Jan Wieck" <wieck@debis.com>, "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2000-05-02T01:42:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org]On > Behalf Of Tom Lane > > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > > A while ago I went on record saying that elog is a pain for the > user. Now > > I'd like to add it's a pain for developers, too. Having what's > essentially > > an exception model without a way to catch exceptions is disastrous. > > I think that's a bit overstated ... we've gotten along fine with this > model so far, and I haven't seen any compelling reason to change it. I agree with Peter at this point. For example,even basic functions call elog() easily but we can't catch the error and we(at least I) couldn't call basic functions easily. In fact I suffered very much to avoid elog() call in order to enable dropping tables whose base relation files has already been removed Regards. Hiroshi Inoue Inoue@tpf.co.jp