| From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Subject: | Re: Out-of-memory error reports in libpq |
| Date: | 2021-07-29 07:01:52 |
| Message-ID: | CAHut+Pthu7wpO4q9Heuxq8dvMH1vhSmUFEyDCPzyJBEG8PyEgQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(This is not a code review - this is just to satisfy my curiosity)
I've seen lots of code like this where I may have been tempted to use
a ternary operator for readability, so I was wondering is there a PG
convention to avoid such ternary operator assignments, or is it simply
a personal taste thing, or is there some other reason?
For example:
if (msg)
res->errMsg = msg;
else
res->errMsg = libpq_gettext("out of memory\n");
VERSUS:
res->errMsg = msg ? msg : libpq_gettext("out of memory\n");
------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-07-29 07:16:59 | Re: Some code cleanup for pgbench and pg_verifybackup |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-07-29 06:27:35 | Re: alter table set TABLE ACCESS METHOD |