Re: Change definitions of bitmap flags to bit-shifting style
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Change definitions of bitmap flags to bit-shifting style |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6dcd58bf-393d-f284-283c-ffb85767dd4c@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Change definitions of bitmap flags to bit-shifting style (James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/6/20 11:44 AM, James Coleman wrote: > On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 1:25 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz > <mailto:michael@paquier.xyz>> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 10:31:09PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > The hexadecimal representation is more natural to me than > bit-shifting, > > so I would prefer to use that style too. But maybe I'm trained > to it > > because of looking at t_infomask symbols constantly. > > If we are going to change all that, hexa style sounds good to me too. > Would it be worth an addition to the docs, say in [1] to tell that > this is a preferred style? > > [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/source-conventions.html > <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/source-conventions.html>? > -- > Michael > > > > In my view the bit shifting approach makes it more obvious a single > bit is being set, but on the other hand the hex approach makes it > easier to compare in debugging. > > I’m not really sure which to prefer, though I think I would have > leaned slightly towards the former. > > Perhaps we should put one style or the other in a comment. I take Tom's point, but after the number of bits shifted gets above some number I have trouble remembering which bit it is, and while of course I can work it out, it can be a very minor nuisance. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: