Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Subject: Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs
Date: 2019-07-15 08:51:36
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-docs

> On 12 Jul 2019, at 17:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> writes:
>> To take into account Tom's comment, I'd suggest a middle ground by
>> commenting a public and private part explicitely in the struct, something
>> like:

Thanks for the review!

>> typedef struct {
>> /* PUBLIC members to be used by callers ... */
>> ...
>> ...
>> /* PRIVATE members, not intended for external usage ... */
>> ...
>> } ... ;
> One problem is that the members we've retroactively decided are "public"
> are in the middle of the struct :-(.
> But it occurs to me that there's no good reason we couldn't re-order the
> members, as long as we only do so on HEAD and not in released versions.
> That would make it a bit less inconsistent and easier to add labels
> such as you suggest.

I quite like this suggestion, so I’ve changed the patch to do this. Removed
the doc: in the commit message to indicate that this is no longer just touching

cheers ./daniel

Attachment Content-Type Size
spitupletable-v2.patch application/octet-stream 3.3 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2019-07-15 10:21:03 Re: Outdated tip in the "Adding a column section"
Previous Message Daniel Westermann (DWE) 2019-07-14 06:12:42 Outdated tip in the "Adding a column section"