On 10/31/09, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On fre, 2009-10-30 at 17:13 +0200, Marko Kreen wrote:
> > I vote for handling tuple with 1 element better, otherwise keep old
> > behaviour.
> >
> > I don't think breaking multi-arg calls is good idea, as they may be used
> > only in special situations.
On fre, 2009-10-30 at 17:13 +0200, Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 10/30/09, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Calling PL/Python's elog functions exposes some curious behavior. For
> > example, calling plpy.error('foo') prints
> >
> > ERROR: ('foo',)
> >
> > (instead of the
> >
> > ERROR: foo
> >
> > th
On 10/30/09, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Calling PL/Python's elog functions exposes some curious behavior. For
> example, calling plpy.error('foo') prints
>
> ERROR: ('foo',)
>
> (instead of the
>
> ERROR: foo
>
> that one might have hoped for.) This is an implementation artifact,
> becaus
Calling PL/Python's elog functions exposes some curious behavior. For
example, calling plpy.error('foo') prints
ERROR: ('foo',)
(instead of the
ERROR: foo
that one might have hoped for.) This is an implementation artifact,
because those functions don't check their arguments, just take them
