On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 10:44:23AM -0400, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 12:01:52PM +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
> > Is there some common convention of names?
>
> No, there isn't (for example, pg_stat_backend_id() versus
I know -- for this I asked. IMHO for large project like PostgreSQL
it's important. It's not good if there is possible speculate about
name of new function. It must be unmistakable -- for this is needful
make some convension. If somebody add new function and it's released,
it's in the PostgreSQL almost forever.
> current_schema() -- or pg_get_viewdef() versus obj_description() ).
> Now that we have table functions, we might be using more built-in
> functions to provide information to the user -- so there will be
> an increasing need for some kind of naming convention for built-in
> functions. However, establishing a naming convention without
> breaking backwards compatibility might be tricky.
Yes, but we can try be clean for new stuff.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/
C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz, http://mape.jcu.cz
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
