Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup
Date
Msg-id 98ba2e15-250b-8bce-fa4c-777e0d76cd4e@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] assorted code cleanup  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 9/5/17 15:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> At one time there were C compilers that only accepted the former syntax.

Correct.  Explanation here: http://c-faq.com/ptrs/funccall.html

> I do agree with the idea that we should use the * notation in cases where
> the reader might otherwise think that a plain function was being invoked,
> ie I don't like
> 
>     some_function_pointer(args);
> 
> Even if the compiler isn't confused, readers might be.  But in the case of
> 
>     structname->pointerfield(args);
> 
> it's impossible to read that as a plain function call, so I'm okay with
> dropping the extra punctuation there.

Committed that way.  Thanks.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part ofmultiple-item INTO list
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [bug fix] Savepoint-related statements terminates connection