Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170314173410.fbpjy2uksbpyl4ou@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4 (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-03-14 08:28:02 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Andres Freund wrote: > > > EEO_SWITCH(op->opcode) > > { > > EEO_CASE(EEO_DONE): > > goto out; > > Oh my. > > > which is a bit annoying. (the EEO_CASE is either a jump label or a case > > statement, depending on computed goto availability). > > > > It seems we could either: > > 1) live with the damage > > 2) disable pgindent > > 3) move the : inside EEO_CASE's definition, and only use {} blocks. > > I think 3) is nasty because the result doesn't look like normal C. We have a bunch of such constructs already however. foreach(), PG_TRY(). That means 3) has the advantage that our editors and pgindent can already deal with it. > EEO_CASE() are potentially jump labels, then indentation becomes > correct. Why not accept it? It looks odd, but that gives a better hint > to the reader about what's going on. Seems likely that every editor would indent them differently :( I'm leaning towards 3) for the reasons above and after trying out the different indentations, but I don't have a strong opinion. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: