Thread: designated initializers

(Coming from https://postgr.es/m/20220809193616.5uucf33piwdxn452@alvherre.pgsql )

On 2022-Aug-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> On 2022-Aug-09, Andres Freund wrote:
> 
> > Mildly wondering whether we ought to use designated initializers instead,
> > given we're whacking it around already. Too easy to get the order wrong when
> > adding new members, and we might want to have optional callbacks too.
> 
> Strong +1.  It makes code much easier to navigate (see XmlTableRoutine
> and compare with heapam_methods, for example).

For example, I propose the attached.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"El que vive para el futuro es un iluso, y el que vive para el pasado,
un imbécil" (Luis Adler, "Los tripulantes de la noche")

Hi,

On 2022-08-10 16:03:00 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> (Coming from https://postgr.es/m/20220809193616.5uucf33piwdxn452@alvherre.pgsql )
> 
> On 2022-Aug-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> 
> > On 2022-Aug-09, Andres Freund wrote:
> > 
> > > Mildly wondering whether we ought to use designated initializers instead,
> > > given we're whacking it around already. Too easy to get the order wrong when
> > > adding new members, and we might want to have optional callbacks too.
> > 
> > Strong +1.  It makes code much easier to navigate (see XmlTableRoutine
> > and compare with heapam_methods, for example).
> 
> For example, I propose the attached.

+1 I've fought with this one when fixing a conflict when rebasing a patch...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Hello

On 2022-Aug-10, Andres Freund wrote:

> +1 I've fought with this one when fixing a conflict when rebasing a patch...

Right -- pushed, thanks.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/