Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 11524.1504639947@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Do you mean specifically the hook variables, or any function pointers? > I can see your point in the above case, but for example here > - if ((*tinfo->f_lt) (o.upper, c.upper, flinfo)) > + if (tinfo->f_lt(o.upper, c.upper, flinfo)) > I think there is no loss of clarity and the extra punctuation makes it > more complicated to read. At one time there were C compilers that only accepted the former syntax. But we have already occurrences of the latter in our tree, and no one has complained, so I think that's a dead issue by now. I do agree with the idea that we should use the * notation in cases where the reader might otherwise think that a plain function was being invoked, ie I don't like some_function_pointer(args); Even if the compiler isn't confused, readers might be. But in the case of structname->pointerfield(args); it's impossible to read that as a plain function call, so I'm okay with dropping the extra punctuation there. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: