> On Jul 31, 2025, at 10:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
>> I had this lying around as a draft patch, as part of my ongoing campaign
>> to convert many complicated macros to static inline functions. Since
>> the topic was mentioned in another thread [0], I cleaned up the patch so
>> that we can all look at it.
>
> I had just finished doing exactly that, per my idea in the other
> thread of providing both pointer and Datum variants where needed.
> I'll look more closely at yours in a bit, but here's mine.
>
> regards, tom lane
Thank you both for diving into this, I really appreciate the clarity
this brings to the code. I've applied both patches and compared the two
approaches. I build and tested Peter's patches on macOS (15.5, M3 Pro)
using meson and found no issues. It's clear you both had the same idea
in mind, but with slight differences in application.
I find VARDATA(DatumGetPointer(key_datums[I])) to be more clear
than VARDATA_D(key_datums[I]). Yes, the line length suffers a bit but I
find it much more readable.
I'm +1 for changes like this, and this one in particular.
Just my $0.02, best.
-greg
