On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 17:31 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Looks good to me, except that pg_asprintf seems to be checking ret
> instead of rc.
Ah, good catch!
> Is there a reason for the API discrepancy of pg_asprintf vs. psprintf?
> I don't see that we use the integer return value anywhere. Callers
> interested in the return value can use asprintf directly (and you have
> already inserted callers that do nonstandard things using direct
> asprintf).
I wanted to keep pg_asprintf the same as asprintf. I think there is
some value in that, but it's not supremely important.
