2013/12/9 Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > 2013/12/8 Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> > >> > >> In my opinion, the idea of having a separate lint checker for a language > >> is antiquated. If there are problems, they should be diagnosed at > >> compile time or run time. You can add options about warning levels or > >> strictness if there are concerns about which diagnostics are > >> appropriate. > > > > > > There are two points, that should be solved > > > > a) introduction a dependency to other object in schema - now CREATE > FUNCTION > > is fully independent on others > > > > b) slow start - if we check all paths on start, then start can be slower > - > > and some functions should not work due dependency on temporary tables. > > > > I am thinking about possible marking a function by #option (we have same > > idea) > > > > some like > > > > #option check_on_first_start > > #option check_on_create > > #option check_newer > > what exactly check_newer means, does it mean whenever a function is > replaced (changed)? > > no, it means, so request for check will be ignored ever - some functions cannot be deeply checked due using dynamic SQL or dynamic created data types - temporary tables created in functions.
Regards Pavel > > But still I have no idea, how to push check without possible slowdown > > execution with code duplication > > > With Regards, > Amit Kapila. > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com >
