Propose a new function - list_is_empty

From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Propose a new function - list_is_empty
Date: 2022-08-16 01:19:47
Message-ID: CAHut+PtQYe+ENX5KrONMfugf0q6NHg4hR5dAhqEXEc2eefFeig@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

During a recent code review I was going to suggest that some new code
would be more readable if the following:
if (list_length(alist) == 0) ...

was replaced with:
if (list_is_empty(alist)) ...

but then I found that actually no such function exists.

~~~

Searching the PG source found many cases using all kinds of
inconsistent ways to test for empty Lists:
e.g.1 if (list_length(alist) > 0)
e.g.2 if (list_length(alist) == 0)
e.g.3 if (list_length(alist) != 0)
e.g.4 if (list_length(alist) >= 1)
e.g.5 if (list_length(alist) < 1)

Of course, all of them work OK as-is, but by using list_is_empty all
those can be made consistent and often also more readable as to the
code intent.

Patch 0001 adds a new function 'list_is_empty'.
Patch 0002 makes use of it.

Thoughts?

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0002-list_is_empty-use-the-new-function.patch application/octet-stream 18.5 KB
v1-0001-list_is_empty-new-function.patch application/octet-stream 714 bytes

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-08-16 01:27:56 Re: Propose a new function - list_is_empty
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-08-16 01:16:14 Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage