Re: Using defines for protocol characters - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dave Cramer
Subject Re: Using defines for protocol characters
Date
Msg-id CADK3HH+aXM82oY-tUzidBS1bfqoUFubVxygmFaBFZFV=3iHYdw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Using defines for protocol characters  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: Using defines for protocol characters
List pgsql-hackers


On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 03:10, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
On 2023-Aug-07, Peter Smith wrote:

> I guess, your patch would not be much different; you can still have
> all the nice names and assign the appropriate values to the enum
> values same as now, but using an enum you might also gain
> type-checking in the code and also get warnings for the "switch"
> statements if there are any cases accidentally omitted.

Hmm, I think omitting a 'default' clause (which is needed when you want
warnings for missing clauses) in a switch that handles protocol traffic
is not great, because the switch would misbehave when the network
counterpart sends a broken message.  I'm not sure we want to do that.
It could become a serious security problem if confronted with a
malicious libpq.


Any other changes required ?

Dave 
--
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Configurable FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_BACKEND
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Using defines for protocol characters