Re: [HACKERS] taking stdbool.h into use

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 10/29/17 08:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I spotted a couple of other things while looking at your patches and
>> the code tree.
>>
>> -   return (ginCompareItemPointers(&btree->itemptr, iptr) > 0) ? TRUE : FALSE;
>> +   return (ginCompareItemPointers(&btree->itemptr, iptr) > 0) ? true : false;
>> You could simplify that at the same time by removing such things. The
>> "false : true" pattern is less frequent than the "true : false"
>> pattern.
>
> I have found many more instances like that.  It might be worth
> simplifying a bit, but that sounds like a separate undertaking.

Yeah, I just mentioned one for reference. And I can see 66 instances.
It may be not worth changing either to simplify back-patching.

>> Some comments in the code still mention FALSE or TRUE:
>> - hashsearch.c uses FALSE in some comments.
>> - In execExpr.c, ExecCheck mentions TRUE.
>
> That one is an SQL TRUE, so I left it.

Oops. You are right. I tried to be careful with what was referring to SQL and C.
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers