Re: [HACKERS] pl/python tracebacks v2

2011-04-20 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 23:54 +0200, Jan Urbański wrote: > > Ouch, just today I found a flaw in this, namely that it assumes the > > lineno from the traceback always refers to the PL/Python function. If > > you create a PL/Python function that imports some code, runs it, and > > that code raises an e

Re: [HACKERS] pl/python tracebacks v2

2011-04-06 Thread Jan Urbański
On 06/04/11 22:16, Jan Urbański wrote: > On 06/04/11 21:38, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On mån, 2011-03-21 at 00:40 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: >>> I finally got around to updating the PL/Python tracebacks patch. The >>> other day I was writing some very simple PL/Python code and the lack of >>> trac

Re: [HACKERS] pl/python tracebacks v2

2011-04-06 Thread Jan Urbański
On 06/04/11 21:38, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On mån, 2011-03-21 at 00:40 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: >> I finally got around to updating the PL/Python tracebacks patch. The >> other day I was writing some very simple PL/Python code and the lack of >> tracebacks is extremely annoying. > > I tweaked

Re: [HACKERS] pl/python tracebacks v2

2011-04-06 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On mån, 2011-03-21 at 00:40 +0100, Jan Urbański wrote: > I finally got around to updating the PL/Python tracebacks patch. The > other day I was writing some very simple PL/Python code and the lack of > tracebacks is extremely annoying. I tweaked this a bit to make the patch less invasive, and then

Re: [HACKERS] pl/python tracebacks v2

2011-03-20 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On 20 March 2011 23:40, Jan Urbański wrote: > I'll update the commitfest app for the 2011-Next commitfest, but if > someone would like to pick this up and include it in the 9.1 PL/Python > revamp pack, I'd be thrilled. I would also be thrilled. I definitely share your sense of frustration about t