Re: Using defines for protocol characters

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Using defines for protocol characters
Date: 2023-08-09 17:08:05
Message-ID: 20230809170805.6ugrqutmg7qfmn22@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2023-Aug-09, Nathan Bossart wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 10:44:42AM -0600, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 at 10:34, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> I agree with Peter: let's use the names in the protocol document
> >> with a single prefix. I've got mixed feelings about whether that prefix
> >> should have an underscore, though.
> >
> > Well, we're getting closer :)
>
> I'm +0.5 for the underscore.

We use CamelCase_With_UnderScores in other places (PgStat_Counter,
AtEOXact_PgStat_Database). It's not pretty, and at times it's not
comfortable to type, but I think it will be less ugly here than in those
other places (particularly because there'll be a single underscore), and
I also agree that readability is better with the underscore than
without.

So, I'm also +0.5 on having them, much as it displeases Robert.

--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2023-08-09 17:21:53 Re: Cirrus-ci is lowering free CI cycles - what to do with cfbot, etc?
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2023-08-09 17:00:34 Re: Use of additional index columns in rows filtering