Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié ene 25 17:32:49 -0300 2012:
>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>> > New version that repairs a defective test case.
>>
>> Committed.  I don't find this to be particularly good style:
>>
>> +       for (i = 0; i < old_natts && ret; i++)
>> +               ret = (!IsPolymorphicType(get_opclass_input_type(classObjectId[i
>> +                          irel->rd_att->attrs[i]->atttypid == typeObjectId[i]);
>>
>> ...but I am not sure whether we have any formal policy against it, so
>> I just committed it as-is for now.  I would have surrounded the loop
>> with an if (ret) block and written the body of the loop as if
>> (condition) { ret = false; break; }.
>
> I find that code way too clever.

The way he wrote it, or the way I proposed to write it?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company