Re: Better testing coverage and unified coding for plpgsql loops

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:
>> - can this macro become a function?

> The "exit_action" argument makes it tough. It can probably be done --
> it seems to require contorting the one callsite that uses "goto" though.

It could be converted into a function returning bool, a la

if (!loop_rc_processing(...))
break;

but then the burden is on you to show there's negligible performance
impact, a question that doesn't arise when just macro-izing existing
code. I suppose the function could be made inline, but then we're
right back to the question of how well lcov will display the actual
code coverage.

regards, tom lane