Raising the Pl/Perl required version
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
This was raised before, but I can't find the exact thread. I'd
like to re-open the idea of boosting the minimum Perl version
for PL/Perl to 5.6. My primary motivation is to provide use
of "our" for the %TD hash, as mentioned before (cannot find the
email right now). Being as 5.6 was released nearly six years
ago, in March of 2000, I'm hoping that this won't meet too many
objections.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200602111428
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFD7jsQvJuQZxSWSsgRAkH8AJ9cf9uCjVKNBUZwtUT/q5ODtZZrfQCgtaVW
n43hYpQqHObl5eIRKijFGUM=
=ko1M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
This was raised before, but I can't find the exact thread. I'd
like to re-open the idea of boosting the minimum Perl version
for PL/Perl to 5.6.
I don't think this is unreasonable.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
See here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-10/msg00438.php
I don't mind requiring 5.6, but I do want to think carefully about the
implications of changing the declaration of $_TD from "my" to "our",
especially if multiple triggers fire. Is there a danger we might clobber
one?
cheers
andrew
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
Show quoted text
This was raised before, but I can't find the exact thread. I'd
like to re-open the idea of boosting the minimum Perl version
for PL/Perl to 5.6. My primary motivation is to provide use
of "our" for the %TD hash, as mentioned before (cannot find the
email right now). Being as 5.6 was released nearly six years
ago, in March of 2000, I'm hoping that this won't meet too many
objections.