Re: A minor correction in comment in heaptuple.c

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A minor correction in comment in heaptuple.c
Date: 2013-06-18 17:19:40
Message-ID: 20130618171940.GH5646@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2013-06-18 13:14:30 -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:38:45 +0200
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > > How about "check if attnum is out of range according to the tupdesc"
> > > instead?
> >
> > I can't follow. Minus the word 'NULL' - which carries meaning - your
> > suggested comment pretty much is the same as the existing comment
> > except that you use 'check' instead of 'return'.
>
> The difference is that I say what the purpose of the function is but
> don't say what it actually returns. The code itself does that.
>
> > Original:
> > /*
> > * return NULL if attnum is out of range according to the
> > tupdesc */
>
> Obviously wrong so it should be changed.

The NULL refers to the *meaning* of the function (remember, it's called
slot_attisnull) . Which is to test whether an attribute is null. Not to
a C NULL.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2013-06-18 17:31:40 Re: ASYNC Privileges proposal
Previous Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 2013-06-18 17:14:30 Re: A minor correction in comment in heaptuple.c