Re: Should we use MemSet or {0} for struct initialization?

From: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we use MemSet or {0} for struct initialization?
Date: 2023-09-19 10:39:13
Message-ID: CAMbWs4-84LLhy0uXRvw9dSM7EJVSVwdTVRUtP6g6+y4HHsMvyg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:37 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
wrote:

> On 31.08.23 10:32, Richard Guo wrote:
> > While working on a bug in expandRecordVariable() I noticed that in the
> > switch statement for case RTE_SUBQUERY we initialize struct ParseState
> > with {0} while for case RTE_CTE we do that with MemSet. I understand
> > that there is nothing wrong with this, just cannot get away with the
> > inconsistency inside the same function (sorry for the nitpicking).
> >
> > Do we have a preference for how to initialize structures? From 9fd45870
> > it seems that we prefer to {0}. So here is a trivial patch doing that.
> > And with a rough scan the MemSet calls in pg_stat_get_backend_subxact()
> > can also be replaced with {0}, so include that in the patch too.
>
> The first part (parse_target.c) was already addressed by e0e492e5a9. I
> have applied the second part (pgstatfuncs.c).

Thanks for pushing this.

Thanks
Richard

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2023-09-19 10:44:04 Re: CHECK Constraint Deferrable
Previous Message jian he 2023-09-19 10:37:45 Re: remaining sql/json patches