From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: warnings for invalid function casts |
Date: | 2020-07-07 09:45:41 |
Message-ID: | 2410175f-255d-ab5c-e95e-2dfc1bad3f97@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-07-04 16:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Do people prefer a typedef or just writing it out, like it's done in the
>> Python code?
>
> I'm for a typedef. There is *nothing* readable about "(void (*) (void))",
> and the fact that it's theoretically incorrect for the purpose doesn't
> exactly aid intelligibility either. With a typedef, not only are
> the uses more readable but there's a place to put a comment explaining
> that this is notionally wrong but it's what gcc specifies to use
> to suppress thus-and-such warnings.
Makes sense. New patch here.
>> But if we prefer a typedef then I'd propose
>> GenericFuncPtr like in the initial patch.
>
> That name is OK by me.
I changed that to pg_funcptr_t, to look a bit more like C and less like
Java. ;-)
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-Fix-Wcast-function-type-warnings.patch | text/plain | 11.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-07-07 09:50:26 | Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk (hash_mem) |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-07-07 09:36:10 | Re: Quick doc patch |