Re: New "single-call SRF" APIs are very confusingly named

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: New "single-call SRF" APIs are very confusingly named
Date: 2022-10-16 22:04:43
Message-ID: 20221016220443.vjd7a5dj34gj7vck@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2022-10-16 13:22:41 -0700, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 7:41 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> - * SetSingleFuncCall
> + * Compatibility function for v15.
> + */
> +void
> +SetSingleFuncCall(FunctionCallInfo fcinfo, bits32 flags)
> +{
> + InitMaterializedSRF(fcinfo, flags);
> +}
> +
>
> Any reason not to use a macro?

Yes - it'd introduce an ABI break, i.e. an already compiled extension
referencing SetSingleFuncCall() wouldn't fail to load into an upgraded sever,
due to the reference to the SetSingleFuncCall, which wouldn't exist anymore.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-10-16 22:09:14 Re: New "single-call SRF" APIs are very confusingly named
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-10-16 21:59:48 Re: macos ventura SDK spews warnings