Thread: Added the word TODO in comments

This just so that somebody looking for TODO items in the source can find this one too.

Regards,

--
gurjeet[.singh]@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | yahoo }.com

"Gurjeet Singh" <singh.gurjeet@gmail.com> writes:
> This just so that somebody looking for TODO items in the source can find
> this one too.

If you're looking for TODO items, why wouldn't you be looking in the
TODO document?
        regards, tom lane

The comment, "This should be improved someday" sure sounds like a TODO to me.

I don't know if it should make it to the TODO doc, as that lists high-level/abstract feature-request-like items.

Probably I should stop acting on impulse here. Hey, can someone around here lend me his rock!! ( no offence intended :)

Best wishes to all in the new year...

Best regards,

On Jan 1, 2007, at 2:24 AM, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> The comment, "This should be improved someday" sure sounds like a  
> TODO to me.
>
> I don't know if it should make it to the TODO doc, as that lists  
> high-level/abstract feature-request-like items.

Given that the TODO list is the official compilation of things that  
need to get done, ISTM that anything warranting a TODO or XXX in the  
code should probably be on the TODO list. Leaving the TODO or XXX in  
the code is fine, since someone might be inspired to fix it while  
noodling around, but something not on the TODO is much less likely to  
get fixed.
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:16:41 -0500
Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org> wrote:
> Given that the TODO list is the official compilation of things that  
> need to get done, ISTM that anything warranting a TODO or XXX in the  
> code should probably be on the TODO list.

There are a wide class of possible improvements / fixes that are too small to bother adding to the TODO list, but
shouldstill be recorded somewhere. Recording those improvements in the source code seems better than not recording them
atall.
 

Also, minor improvements to some part of the implementation are typically dependent on their context in the source
code.Since TODO entries are often lacking in context as it is, I don't think trying to move everything to the TODO list
wouldbe wise.
 

-Neil

On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 02:45:24PM -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:16:41 -0500
> Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org> wrote:
> > Given that the TODO list is the official compilation of things that  
> > need to get done, ISTM that anything warranting a TODO or XXX in the  
> > code should probably be on the TODO list.
> 
> There are a wide class of possible improvements / fixes that are too small to bother adding to the TODO list, but
shouldstill be recorded somewhere. Recording those improvements in the source code seems better than not recording them
atall.
 
> 
> Also, minor improvements to some part of the implementation are typically dependent on their context in the source
code.Since TODO entries are often lacking in context as it is, I don't think trying to move everything to the TODO list
wouldbe wise.
 

Yeah, 'anything' is too strong... but I've certainly run across some
stuff that could go into the TODO. There's some things in there
questioning algorithm choices that probably won't ever get done unless
someone goes and researches them, for example.
-- 
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)