From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | ranier_gyn(at)hotmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [Proposal] Level4 Warnings show many shadow vars |
Date: | 2019-12-09 21:49:42 |
Message-ID: | 20191209214942.GA31268@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Dec-09, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > >BTW, if we do go forward with changing the RedoRecPtr uses, I'm not
> > >in love with "XRedoRecPtr" as a replacement parameter name; it conveys
> > >nothing much, and the "X" prefix is already overused in that area of
> > >the code. Perhaps "pRedoRecPtr" would be a better choice? Or maybe
> > >make the local variables be all-lower-case "redorecptr", which would
> > >fit well in context in places like
> > pRedoRecPtr, It's perfect for me.
>
> Anyway I strongly object to the name 'pRedoRecPtr', which suggests as
> if it is a C-pointer to some variable. (And I believe we use Hungarian
> notation only if we don't have a better way...) LatestRedoRecPtr
> looks better to me.
We have a not-consistently-used convention that names in CamelCase are
used for global variables. Naming a function parameter in that style
seems pointlessly confusing. I would rather use redorecptr as Tom
suggested, which fits with the style used for the other arguments of
that function. BTW prepending an X or a p looks like minimum effort...
I'd stay away from that.
It's probably a lost cause to enforce such a style with ironclad
consistency, but I suggest we make at least a token effort at it, and
keep our source as least confusing as possible.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-12-09 22:00:17 | Re: Using multiple extended statistics for estimates |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-12-09 21:38:04 | Re: [Proposal] Level4 Warnings show many shadow vars |