Re: aclchk.c refactor

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: aclchk.c refactor
Date: 2005-11-21 16:57:40
Message-ID: 2507.1132592260@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches pgsql-www

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Now I noticed that there are multiple functions pg_class_aclmask,
> pg_database_aclmask, pg_language_aclmask, etc. Is there any objection
> to making the exported routine expose the object type as an AclKind
> parameter instead of having one function for each object type?

How about "in addition to" instead of "instead"? I see no reason to
impose extra notation and a level of indirection on the places that know
perfectly well which object type they are dealing with.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-11-21 17:03:59 Re: drop database if exists
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-11-21 16:34:41 Re: aclchk.c refactor

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2005-11-21 17:53:54 Mirror database down?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-11-21 16:34:41 Re: aclchk.c refactor