Re: pg_archivecleanup bug
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_archivecleanup bug |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140319003001.GA16122@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_archivecleanup bug (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_archivecleanup bug
Re: pg_archivecleanup bug |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 09:13:28PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 03/18/2014 09:04 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > >On 18 March 2014 18:55, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > >>That said, I don't find comma expression to be particularly "not > >>simple". > > > >Maybe, but we've not used it before anywhere in Postgres, so I don't > >see a reason to start now. Especially since C is not the native > >language of many people these days and people just won't understand > >it. > > Agreed. The psqlODBC code is littered with comma expressions, and > the first time I saw it, it took me a really long time to figure out > what "if (foo = malloc(...), foo) { } " meant. And I consider myself > quite experienced with C. I can see how the comma syntax would be confusing, though it does the job well. Attached is a patch that does the double-errno. However, some of these loops are large, and there are 'continue' calls in there, causing the addition of many new errno locations. I am not totally comfortable that this new coding layout will stay unbroken. Would people accept? for (errno = 0; (dirent = readdir(dir)) != NULL; errno = 0) That would keep the errno's together and avoid the 'continue' additions. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: