Re: Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1844517.1651502932@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes: > There are many calls to construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for > built-in types, for example, when dealing with system catalog columns. > These all hardcode the type attributes necessary to pass to these functions. > To simplify this a bit, add construct_array_builtin(), > deconstruct_array_builtin() as wrappers that centralize this hardcoded > knowledge. This simplifies many call sites and reduces the amount of > hardcoded stuff that is spread around. > I also considered having genbki.pl generate lookup tables for these > hardcoded values, similar to schemapg.h, but that ultimately seemed > excessive. +1 --- the added overhead of the switch statements is probably a reasonable price to pay for the notational simplification and bug-proofing. One minor coding gripe is that compilers that don't know that elog(ERROR) doesn't return will certainly generate "use of possibly-uninitialized variable" complaints. Suggest inserting "return NULL;" or similar into the default: cases. I'd also use more specific error wording to help people find where they need to add code when they make use of a new type; maybe like "type %u not supported by construct_array_builtin". regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: