Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Clearly deprecating rules implies some loss of functionality - there > is no exact, drop-in equivalent to something that magically rewrites > SQL that isn't equally baroque and problematic. If that's the bar, > then detractors of rules should stop wasting their breath, because the > bar has been set impossibly high.
I believe an advice system is a good contender here, as already proposed here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-10/msg00610.php See defadvice in Emacs Lisp and The Standard Method Combination of the Common Lisp Object System as sources of inspiration here. http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Advising-Functions.html http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/object-reorientation-generic-functions.html It basically would be rules without the multiple evaluation risks, yet still the multiple evaluation feature when you need it, and with explicit control over it. Then if you insist on comparing to a macro facility, as we're talking about dynamic code rewriting, maybe we need to compare RULEs to the lisp style macro facility, which is nothing like a pre-processor facility (in lisp, that's the reader, I think). Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
