Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqTqHHicdJTwk5r3Wg=ggrJDqRor9-ByCgWEGK+9GiqqtQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> We need to decide what to do about this.  I disagree with Peter: I
> think that regardless of stdbool, what we've got right now is sloppy
> coding - bad style if nothing else.  Furthermore, I think that while C
> lets you use any non-zero value to represent true, our bool type is
> supposed to contain only one of those two values.  Therefore, I think
> we should commit the full patch, back-patch it as far as somebody has
> the energy for, and move on.  But regardless, this patch can't keep
> sitting in the CommitFest - we either have to take it or reject it,
> and soon.

+1, I would suggest to move ahead, !! is not really Postgres-like anyway.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joel Jacobson
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Provide much better wait information in pg_stat_activity.
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean