Re: get rid of Pointer type, mostly

Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
> In a previous thread[0], the question was asked, 'Why do we bother with
> a "Pointer" type?'. So I looked into get rid of it.
> There are two stages to this. One is changing all code that wants to do
> pointer arithmetic to use char * instead of relying on Pointer being
> char *. Then we can change Pointer to be void * and remove a bunch of
> casts.

I'm in favor of that ...

> The second is getting rid of uses of Pointer for variables where you
> might as well use void * directly. These are actually not that many.

... but not of that. In particular, I think it's just fine if
DatumGetPointer and PointerGetDatum take and return Pointer.

regards, tom lane