Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> writes:
>> There are a couple of points worth bikeshedding perhaps. I didn't
>> spend much thought on the wrapper functions' names, but it's surely
>> true that the semantic difference between contain_mutable_functions
>> and ContainMutableFunctions is quite un-apparent from those names.
>> Anybody got a better idea?
> Oh no! We encountered one of the most difficult problems in computer
> science [1].
Indeed :-(. Looking at it again this morning, I'm thinking of
using "contain_mutable_functions_after_planning" --- what do you
think of that?
regards, tom lane