Re: popcount

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>
Subject: Re: popcount
Date: 2021-01-19 00:15:35
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:34:10AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > [ assorted nits ]

fixed, I think.

> At the level of bikeshedding ... I quite dislike using the name "popcount"
> for these functions. I'm aware that some C compilers provide primitives
> of that name, but I wouldn't expect a SQL programmer to know that;
> without that context the name seems pretty random and unintuitive.
> Moreover, it invites confusion with SQL's use of "pop" to abbreviate
> "population" in the statistical aggregates, such as var_pop().
> Perhaps something along the lines of count_ones() or count_set_bits()
> would be more apropos.

Done that way.

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Phone: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres:

Attachment Content-Type Size
v4-0001-popcount.patch text/x-diff 7.3 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2021-01-19 00:17:34 Re: Is it worth accepting multiple CRLs?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2021-01-18 23:21:19 Re: Key management with tests