Re: Split copy.

Thanks for feedback, attached is a new patch version.

On 11/11/2020 21:49, Soumyadeep Chakraborty wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 1:30 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
>> I also split/duplicated the CopyStateData struct into CopyFromStateData
>> and CopyToStateData. Many of the fields were common, but many were not,
>> and I think some duplication is nicer than a struct where you use some
>> fields and others are unused. I put the common formatting options into a
>> new CopyFormatOptions struct.
> 
> Would we be better off if we sub-struct CopyState <- Copy{From,To}State?
> Like this:
> typedef struct Copy{From|To}StateData
> {
> CopyState cs;
> // Fields specific to COPY FROM/TO follow..
> }

Hmm. I don't think that would be better. There isn't actually that much 
in common between CopyFromStateData and CopyToStateData, and a little 
bit of duplication seems better.

> 6.
> 
>> /* create workspace for CopyReadAttributes results */
>> if (!cstate->opts.binary)
> 
> Can we replace this if with an else?

Seems better as it is IMO, the if- and else-branches are not really 
related to each other, even though they both happen to be conditioned on 
cstate->opts.binary.

Fixed all the other things you listed, fixed a bug in setting 
'file_encoding', and trimmed down the #includes.

- Heikki