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: