Re: Updated posix fadvise patch v19 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: Updated posix fadvise patch v19
Date
Msg-id 87vdulgfoh.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Updated posix fadvise patch v19  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

> There are probably no rigid rules on this, but my interpretation of these tags
> is usually this:
>
> XXX -- not sure if this is the best way to do this, needs ideas
> TODO -- specific ideas for improvement
> FIXME -- broken, must be fixed to be usable

I don't have strong feelings on this. I appear to use them more or less
interchangeably. 

Or perhaps what I did is consistent with your rules. Except that the "FIXME"
isn't unusable it's just that I put the prototype in clearly the wrong file.
So it definitely has to be corrected but I don't know where to move it.

The XXX is for something I think is correct now but might need to be fixed if
new callers need tighter memory management. And which could use a close look
by a reviewer to be sure I'm right about the memory management being ok for
now.

FWIW we don't seem to have any such strict rules about them:

$ find . -name \*.[ch] -print0 | xargs -0 grep FIXME | wc -l
22
$ find . -name \*.[ch] -print0 | xargs -0 grep XXX | wc -l
485
$ find . -name \*.[ch] -print0 | xargs -0 grep TODO | wc -l
33

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Paul Schlie
Date:
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Next
From: KaiGai Kohei
Date:
Subject: Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)