| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Add use of asprintf() |
| Date: | 2013-09-22 04:24:34 |
| Message-ID: | 1379823874.24014.6.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 17:31 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Looks good to me, except that pg_asprintf seems to be checking ret
> instead of rc.
Ah, good catch!
> Is there a reason for the API discrepancy of pg_asprintf vs. psprintf?
> I don't see that we use the integer return value anywhere. Callers
> interested in the return value can use asprintf directly (and you have
> already inserted callers that do nonstandard things using direct
> asprintf).
I wanted to keep pg_asprintf the same as asprintf. I think there is
some value in that, but it's not supremely important.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-09-22 04:33:31 | Re: [PATCH] Add use of asprintf() |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2013-09-22 03:10:36 | Re: VMs for Reviewers Available |