Re: Use get_call_result_type() more widely

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 2:07 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>> On the other hand, the measurements have shown that going through the
>> function is significantly slower. So I kinda like the judgement call
>> that Michael and Bharath have made: change to use the function when
>> performance is not an issue, and keep the verbose coding otherwise.

> Seems fairly arbitrary to me.

Agreed ... but the decisions embodied in the code-as-it-stands are
even more arbitrary, being no doubt mostly based on "which function
did you copy to start from" not on any thought about performance.

Now that somebody's made an effort to identify which places are
potentially performance-critical, I don't see why we wouldn't use
the fruits of their labor. Yes, somebody else might draw the line
differently, but drawing a line at all seems like a step forward
to me.

regards, tom lane