Re: A qsort template

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A qsort template
Date: 2021-06-17 01:20:44
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+-uFQgSXd3C24oNxZkwxLDj8yYpV40-kfiJ4g-aEW7TA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:14 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The big problem in my mind, which would not be alleviated in the
> slightest by having a separate file, is that it'd be easy to miss
> removing entries if they ever become obsolete.

I suppose you could invent some kind of declaration syntax in a
comment near the use of the pseudo-typename in the source tree that is
mechanically extracted.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-06-17 01:39:49 Centralizing protective copying of utility statements
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-06-17 01:19:47 Re: Different compression methods for FPI