Robert Haas wrote:
> > IMHO, when manipulating code at this sort of macro scale, it's good to
> > be paranoid and exhaustive, particularly when it doesn't cost you
> > anything anyway. Unlike when writing or fixing a bit of code at a
> > time, which we're all used to, if the compiler doesn't tell you about
> > it, your chances of catching the problem before a bug manifests itself
> > are close to zero.
>
> I was less concerned about the breakage that might be caused by
> variables acquiring unintended referents - which should be unlikely
> anyway given reasonable variable naming conventions - and more
> concerned that the associated refactoring would break recovery. We
> have no recovery regression tests; that's not a good thing.
So we are talking about more than moving files between functions? Yes,
it would be risky to restruction functions, but for someone who
understand that code, it might be safe.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
