| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Error-safe user functions |
| Date: | 2022-12-08 21:00:10 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZOhQ8FfWH9_r58tLtb=AwBn=7ugO2PHh6moR8jhYviUA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 11:32 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> If we go with "struct Node *" then we can solve such problems by
> just repeating "struct Node;" forward-declarations in as many
> headers as we have to.
Yes, I think just putting "struct Node;" in as many places as
necessary is the way to go. Or even:
struct Node;
typedef struct Node Node;
....which I think then allows for Node * to be used later.
A small problem with typedef struct Something *SomethingElse is that
it can get hard to keep track of whether some identifier is a pointer
to a struct or just a struct. This doesn't bother me as much as it
does some other hackers, from what I gather anyway, but I think we
should be pretty judicious in using typedef that way. "SomethingPtr"
really has no advantage over "Something *". It is neither shorter nor
clearer.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-12-08 21:08:40 | Re: fix and document CLUSTER privileges |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2022-12-08 20:56:43 | Re: Aggregate node doesn't include cost for sorting |