Re: refactoring - share str2*int64 functions

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Jul 16, 2019, at 3:30 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
>>> Cool. I'm not exactly sure when we should include 'pg_' in identifier
>>> names.

>> I added the pg_ prefix as a poor man's namespace because the function can be used by external tools (eg contribs), so as to avoid potential name conflicts.

> Yeah, I think if we are going to expose it to front end code there is a good argument for some kind of prefix that makes it sound PostgreSQL-related.

Yeah, I'd tend to err in favor of including "pg_". We might get away
without that as long as the name is never exposed to non-PG code, but
for stuff that's going into src/common/ or src/port/ I think that's
a risky assumption to make.

I'm also in agreement with Michael's comments in
<20190716071144(dot)GF1439(at)paquier(dot)xyz> that this would be a good time
to bring some consistency to the naming of related functions.

regards, tom lane