Horton
Menu

Re: plpython3

James William Pye <lists@jwp.name>

View thread
From: James William Pye <lists@jwp.name>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Nathan Boley <npboley@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, jd@commandprompt.com, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-02-01T21:38:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Feb 1, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I would love to know why PL/Python can't be incrementally improved like
> the rest of our code.

AFAICT, there are two primary, perhaps identifying, parts to a PL extension: code management (compilation, execution, etc) and type I/O (conversion in most PLs). (well, aside from the language itself =)

My proposed extension chooses a different design for both of those parts.

It didn't make sense to try and incrementally change PL/Python because I would have been rewriting the whole thing anyways. Not to mention breaking user code in the process for the mentioned parts--thus the Python 3 target.

Hope this clears things up.