| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: const correctness |
| Date: | 2011-11-10 21:40:32 |
| Message-ID: | 201111102140.pAALeWL01049@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> > I realize the patch only added 1-2 new const functions
>
> No, version 2 of the patch used the strchr() technique and has
> *zero* new functions and *zero* new macros.
Right. I was referring to the non-strchr() approach in the initial
patch.
> > but this is only a small area of the code being patched --- a full
> > solution would have many more complex duplicates, and awkward
> > changes as we add features.
>
> I'm not convinced of that, and I don't think it really has a bearing
> on doing where it can be done with no new functions and no changes
> to the code other than adding "const" to existing lines of code.
Right, again I was referring to the non-strchr() approach, e.g. new
functions.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-11-10 21:49:09 | Re: Parsing output of EXPLAIN command in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-11-10 21:39:04 | Re: const correctness |