From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: POC: converting Lists into arrays |
Date: | 2019-07-31 23:40:09 |
Message-ID: | 30240.1564616409@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> Unfortunately foreach(ListCell *lc, ...) doesn't work with the current
> definition. Which I think isn't great, because the large scopes for loop
> iteration variables imo makes the code harder to reason about.
Yeah, I tried to make that possible when I redid those macros, but
couldn't find a way :-(. Even granting that we're willing to have
a different macro for this use-case, it doesn't seem easy, because
you can only put one <declaration> into the first element of a
for (;;).
That makes the other idea (of a foreach-ish macro declaring the
listcell value variable) problematic, too :-(.
One idea is that we could do something like
foreach_variant(identifier, list_value)
{
type *v = (type *) lfirst_variant(identifier);
...
}
where the "identifier" isn't actually a variable name but just something
we use to construct the ForEachState variable's name. (The only reason
we need it is to avoid confusion in cases with nested foreach's.) The
lfirst_variant macro would fetch the correct value just by looking
at the ForEachState, so there's no separate ListCell* variable at all.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jamison, Kirk | 2019-08-01 00:15:48 | RE: Multivariate MCV list vs. statistics target |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-07-31 23:25:01 | Re: Unused header file inclusion |