Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs
От | Daniel Gustafsson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | E3EABCE1-0B95-4091-9679-DAB065904F97@yesql.se обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs
Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs |
Список | pgsql-docs |
> On 12 Jul 2019, at 17:04, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes: >> To take into account Tom's comment, I'd suggest a middle ground by >> commenting a public and private part explicitely in the struct, something >> like: Thanks for the review! >> typedef struct { >> /* PUBLIC members to be used by callers ... */ >> ... >> ... >> /* PRIVATE members, not intended for external usage ... */ >> ... >> } ... ; > > One problem is that the members we've retroactively decided are "public" > are in the middle of the struct :-(. > > But it occurs to me that there's no good reason we couldn't re-order the > members, as long as we only do so on HEAD and not in released versions. > That would make it a bit less inconsistent and easier to add labels > such as you suggest. I quite like this suggestion, so I’ve changed the patch to do this. Removed the doc: in the commit message to indicate that this is no longer just touching documentation. cheers ./daniel
Вложения
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: