On 2024-10-31 Th 5:10 PM, Jacob Champion wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 3:45 PM Jacob Champion
wrote:
I've added a 0002 as well.
0002 has since been applied [1] so I'm reattaching v4-0001 to get the
cfbot happy again.
--Jacob
[1] https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=41b
On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 3:45 PM Jacob Champion
wrote:
> I've added a 0002 as well.
0002 has since been applied [1] so I'm reattaching v4-0001 to get the
cfbot happy again.
--Jacob
[1] https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=41b023946d
v4-0001-jsonapi-add-lexer-option-to-keep-
On Wed, Oct 2, 2024 at 10:45 AM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Generally looks good. Should we have a check in
> setJsonLexContextOwnsTokens() that we haven't started parsing yet, for
> the incremental case?
Good catch. Added in v4.
> > At the moment, we have a test matrix consisting of "standard front
On 2024-10-01 Tu 3:04 PM, Jacob Champion wrote:
(Tom, thank you for the fixup in 75240f65!)
Off-list, Andrew suggested an alternative approach to the one I'd been
taking: let the client choose whether it wants to take token ownership
to begin with. v3 adds a new flag (and associated API) which
(Tom, thank you for the fixup in 75240f65!)
Off-list, Andrew suggested an alternative approach to the one I'd been
taking: let the client choose whether it wants to take token ownership
to begin with. v3 adds a new flag (and associated API) which will
allow libpq to refuse ownership of those token
On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 10:10:06AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 9:32 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
>> I understand that the part enclosed in parentheses refers to the "if
>> (ptr) pfree(ptr)" structure. I believe we rely on the behavior of
>> free(NULL), which safely does
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 9:32 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> Hi,
Thanks for the review!
> I understand that the part enclosed in parentheses refers to the "if
> (ptr) pfree(ptr)" structure. I believe we rely on the behavior of
> free(NULL), which safely does nothing. (I couldn't find the related
Hi,
At Fri, 24 May 2024 08:43:01 -0700, Jacob Champion
wrote in
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 2:29 PM Jacob Champion
> wrote:
> > Attached is a draft patch to illustrate what I mean, but it's
> > incomplete: it only solves the problem for scalar values.
>
> (Attached is a v2 of that patch; in sol
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 2:29 PM Jacob Champion
wrote:
> Attached is a draft patch to illustrate what I mean, but it's
> incomplete: it only solves the problem for scalar values.
(Attached is a v2 of that patch; in solving a frontend leak I should
probably not introduce a backend segfault.)
--Jac
Hi,
When a client of our JSON parser registers semantic action callbacks,
the parser will allocate copies of the lexed tokens to pass into those
callbacks. The intent is for the callbacks to always take ownership of
the copied memory, and if they don't want it then they can pfree() it.
However, i
10 matches
Mail list logo
