I understand your suggestions but it seems there would be too many
individual items to be readable. Can you suggest a full list so we can
get an idea of how long it would be?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On 11/1/07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >
> > I have not forgotten this suggestion. Do have any ideas what such a
> > list would look like? Examples?
> >
>
> Thanks for the reply Bruce.
>
> Code examples, perhaps with "good style" and "bad style" versions to
> illustrate each point.
>
> In the case of Tom's OP about making all your GETARG calls at the top
> of the function, you could show (for a trivial function) how it looks
> with all the GETARGs stacked neatly at the top, and how it looks with
> the GETARGs scattered and inaccurate.
>
> I think that would make it immediately clear to any newbie why it's a good idea.
>
> > I think we have avoided more details in fear of scaring off coders.
> > People usually follow our style as they gain experience. Having a hard
> > list seems like it would be a lot of do's and don't's.
>
> Just my perspective, but I think you'll scare off a lot more coders by
> giving them no firm guidance in the first place, and then jumping down
> their throats with "you did this wrong" when they post a patch.
>
> Might be worth opening up a wiki page for devs to contribute their
> insights about writing excellent (as opposed to merely passable)
> Postgres code. The GETARG rant could make a good starting point.
>
> Cheers
> BJ
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
