Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvqTu1y1V-zSk_siRVWFGoCoLQgSap0=MPXmnqeuo1ZmFA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Responses Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 19 Sept 2022 at 15:04, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> The general structure of the patchset is now a little more worked out.
> Although it's still not close to being commitable, it should give you
> a better idea of the kind of structure that I'm aiming for. I think
> that this should be broken into a few different parts based on the
> area of the codebase affected (not the type of check used). Even that
> aspect needs more work, because there is still one massive patch --
> this is now the sixth and final patch.

Thanks for updating the patches.

I'm slightly confused about "still not close to being commitable"
along with "this is now the sixth and final patch.".  That seems to
imply that you're not planning to send any more patches but you don't
think this is commitable. I'm assuming I've misunderstood that.

I don't have any problems with 0001, 0002 or 0003.

Looking at 0004 I see a few issues:

1. ConnectDatabase() seems to need a bit more work in the header
comment. There's a reference to AH and AHX.  The parameter is now
called "A".

2. setup_connection() still references AH->use_role in the comments
(line 1102). Similar problem on line 1207 with AH->sync_snapshot_id

3. setupDumpWorker() still makes references to AH->sync_snapshot_id
and AH->use_role in the comments. The parameter is now called "A".

4. dumpSearchPath() still has a comment which references AH->searchpath

0005 looks fine.

I've not looked at 0006 again.

David



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Tree-walker callbacks vs -Wdeprecated-non-prototype
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names