Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> Rather than (or perhaps as well as) marking all these leakproof,
> perhaps we should teach contain_leaky_functions() to automatically
> treat any no-arg function as leakproof, so that we allow user-defined
> functions too. Taking that one step further, perhaps what it should
> really be looking for is Vars in the argument list of a leaky
> function, i.e., contain_leaked_vars() rather than
> contain_leaky_functions().
+1, but that's a totally independent question from what I'm on about
at the moment.
regards, tom lane
