Hi,
On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 10:56:35AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 28.09.25 05:02, Chao Li wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 11:00 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
> > <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah. In particular, probably 99% of such Datum arrays also have an
> > associated array of bool isnull flags. IMO it makes exactly zero
> > sense to const-ify the Datums without similar protection for their
> > isnull flags.
> >
> >
> > Based on Tom's comment, I have made the scope a little broader. If a
> > function's "Datum *" parameter is changed to const, then if it has a
> > pairing "bool *isnull" parameter, I make it const as well. Also, if the
> > function has other pointer parameters that can be const, I change them
> > to const as well. See v3 attached.
>
> I have committed this.
FWIW, I just submitted a patch [1] that extends this approach to all pointer types.
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/aThMaTPjSeFq3qTf@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
