Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:10:49PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Consider
>>
>> if (...)
>> macro;
>> else
>> something-else;
> Sure, but some/most/all macros are called as
> MACRO;
> No real reason there it seems.
Well, they are called that way right now. The point of this discussion
is making the code safe against easily-foreseeable future changes.
Now, I'm privately of the opinion that those macros were a terrible idea
to begin with, because of the fact that they contain continue and break
statements; not only does that make them not act like self-contained
code, but they will break --- silently --- if anyone tries to put them
inside nested loops or switch statements. However, that doesn't seem
nearly as likely as trying to put them inside if-statements; so I'll
just grumble to myself while insisting that we at least keep them safe
against that case.
regards, tom lane
