Re: minor: contrib/btree_gin/btree_gin.c uses DirectFunctionCall3(inet_in,..)
От | Jon Nelson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: minor: contrib/btree_gin/btree_gin.c uses DirectFunctionCall3(inet_in,..) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAKuK5J3QZpMr+5=2yGqgRCyFSCp8-nAfFJx593A7Zkiqe7k2wQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: minor: contrib/btree_gin/btree_gin.c uses DirectFunctionCall3(inet_in,..) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: minor: contrib/btree_gin/btree_gin.c uses
DirectFunctionCall3(inet_in,..)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql@jamponi.net> writes: >> contrib/btree_gin/btree_gin.c uses DirectFunctionCall3(inet_in,..) >> instead of DirectFunctionCall1(inet_in, one_argument). > >> That doesn't seem right. Does such a thing matter? > > It's not really incorrect: in a call going through InputFunctionCall(), > which is the normal path, the two extra arguments would be provided > whether the specific datatype input function needed them or not. > > However, I think the usual convention for DirectFunctionCall() usage > is to pass exactly what the target function uses, since you know > exactly what you're calling. Certainly that's what happens in the > two direct calls to inet_in in the core code. > > So I tend to agree that we should change this call to match the others, > but it's purely cosmetic. So, are there any additional steps that you might recommend that I take? It's such a trivial thing. I could provide a patch, of course, or a pull request off of github if people use that. -- Jon
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: