On 2020-07-04 16:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> Do people prefer a typedef or just writing it out, like it's done in the
>> Python code?
>
> I'm for a typedef. There is *nothing* readable about "(void (*) (void))",
> and the fact that it's theoretically incorrect for the purpose doesn't
> exactly aid intelligibility either. With a typedef, not only are
> the uses more readable but there's a place to put a comment explaining
> that this is notionally wrong but it's what gcc specifies to use
> to suppress thus-and-such warnings.
Makes sense. New patch here.
>> But if we prefer a typedef then I'd propose
>> GenericFuncPtr like in the initial patch.
>
> That name is OK by me.
I changed that to pg_funcptr_t, to look a bit more like C and less like
Java. ;-)
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
