On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 12:33 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > Maybe we don't really need the word "tuple". Like we could just make
> > it slot_store_heap() or SlotStoreHeap(). A slot can only store a
> > tuple, after all.
>
> I don't think it's wise to think of these things as just "slots";
> that name is way too generic. They are "tuple slots", and so that
> word has to stay in the relevant function names.
I suppose there is some potential for confusion with things like
logical replication slots, but I think that these are the most
widely-used type of slot in the backend, so it's not entirely crazy to
think that they deserve a bit of special consideration. I'm not
violently opposed to using four words instead of three
(slot_store_heap_tuple vs. slot_store_heap) but to really spell out
the operation in full you'd need to say something like
HeapTupleTableSlotStoreHeapTuple, and I think that's pretty unwieldy
for what's likely to end up being a very common programming idiom.
It's not crazy that we type 'cd' to change directories rather than
'chdir' or 'change_directory'.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
