Re: REVIEW: patch: remove redundant code from pl_exec.c

* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> I think we should reject this one.

Works for me.

> Using a switch there is a bit problematic since in some cases you want
> to use "break" to exit the loop.  We could replace such breaks by gotos,
> but that would be another strike against the argument that you're making
> things more readable.  I think the switch in exec_stmt_loop is only
> workable because it has no cleanup to do, so it can just "return" in
> places where a loop break would otherwise be needed.  In short: if you
> want to make these all look alike, better to go the other way.

Ah, yeah, good point.  We do use gotos elsewhere for this reason, might
consider revisiting those also, if we're trying to a 'clean-up' patch.
In any case, I'll mark this as rejected.
Thanks!
    Stephen