On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Anyone else want to vote? So far I count 3-1 in favor of making this change.
>
> Actually, on looking at the final form of the patch, it's hard to think
> that it's not just useless API churn. The one existing hook user would
> have to turn around and call get_password_type() anyway, so it's not
> an improvement for that use-case. What's the argument that most other
> use-cases wouldn't need to do the same?
OK, make that 2-2 in favor of the change.
I guess it does seem likely that most users of the hook would need to
do the same, but it seems confusing to pass the same function both x
and f(x), so my vote is to not do that. But I'm not disposed to spend
a lot of energy arguing about it, so if other people feel differently,
that's cool. I just want to reach a decision and either do this or
drop it from the open items list.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
