,--- You/Peter (Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:13:42 +0200) ----*
| On tis, 2011-12-13 at 07:55 -0500, Alex Goncharov wrote:
| > char *PQcmdStatus(PGresult *res);
| > char *PQcmdTuples(PGresult *res);
| >
| > Unreasonable:
| >
| > a. What, these two can modify 'res' I pass in?..
| >
| > b. Oh, yes, because they return 'char *' pointing to
| > 'res->cmdStatus+n', so, a libpq user may write:
| >
| > char *s = PQcmdStatus(res);
| > *s = 'x';
| >
| > and have 'res' modified. (Would be the user's fault, of course.)
| >
| Note that const PGresult * would only warn against changing the
| fields
It would not warn, it would err (the compilation should fail).
| of the PGresult struct. It doesn't do anything about changing the data
| pointed to by pointers in the PGresult struct. So what you are saying
| doesn't follow.
By this logic, passing 'const struct foo *' doesn't have any point and
value, for any function. But we know that this is done (and thank you
for that) in many cases -- a good style, self-documentation and some
protection.
E.g. here:
,--- I/Alex (Tue, 13 Dec 2011 07:55:45 -0500) ----*
| Compare:
|
| int PQntuples(const PGresult *res)
|
| Reasonable: doesn't modify 'res'.
`-------------------------------------------------*
BTW, I have not submitted the context differences, as suggested, only
because of extreme overload at work and the need to do a careful
caller and documentation analysis. I still hope to be able to do it in
a reasonably near future.
-- Alex -- alex-goncharov@comcast.net --
