Re: Boatload of warnings in CVS HEAD :-(
От | Martijn van Oosterhout |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Boatload of warnings in CVS HEAD :-( |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20070504140321.GB28680@svana.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Boatload of warnings in CVS HEAD :-( (Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>) |
Ответы |
Re: Boatload of warnings in CVS HEAD :-(
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:18:31PM +0200, Zdenek Kotala wrote: > Is the reason for keeping this in a code? Another kind of construct is: > > #define PG_RETURN_NULL() \ > do { fcinfo->isnull = true; return (Datum) 0; } while (0) This is a standard way of getting multiple statements into a macro. If the compiler complains, too bad, there isn't a standard alternative. > for(;;) { ... break;} see e.g > http://doxygen.postgresql.org/postgres_8c-source.html#l00198 So that within the loop you can use continue to start it again. > or > why is there while ... break instead if? > http://doxygen.postgresql.org/comment_8c-source.html#l00221 Not sure about this one. It's not wrong, but it is unusual. Maybe someone wanted to make it so that in the future it would handle multiple cases? Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: