Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Those aren't actually equivalent, because of the !nodeptr. IsA() crashes
> for NULL pointers, but the new code won't. Which means 9ba8a9ce4548b et
> al actually weakened some asserts.
> Should we perhaps have one NULL accepting version (castNodeNull?) and
> one that separately asserts that ptr != NULL?
-1 ... if you're going to use something in a way that requires it not tobe null, your code will crash quite efficiently
ona null, with orwithout an assert. I don't think we need the extra cogitive burden oftwo distinct macros for this.
regards, tom lane
