| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: count_nulls(VARIADIC "any") |
| Date: | 2016-02-08 20:22:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAEepm=1FArDLof+Btsq+PAgUaAo_j1fmpaCX7reZ4yBshHQqFQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> [ num_nulls_v6.patch ]
>
>> I started looking through this. It seems generally okay, but I'm not
>> very pleased with the function name "num_notnulls". I think it would
>> be better as "num_nonnulls", as I see Oleksandr suggested already.
>
> Not hearing any complaints, I pushed it with that change and some other
> cosmetic adjustments.
Would num_values be a better name than num_nonnulls?
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-02-08 20:26:19 | Re: count_nulls(VARIADIC "any") |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-02-08 20:19:05 | Re: Recently added typedef "string" is a horrid idea |