Re: warnings for invalid function casts

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Do people prefer a typedef or just writing it out, like it's done in the 
> Python code?

I'm for a typedef.  There is *nothing* readable about "(void (*) (void))",
and the fact that it's theoretically incorrect for the purpose doesn't
exactly aid intelligibility either.  With a typedef, not only are
the uses more readable but there's a place to put a comment explaining
that this is notionally wrong but it's what gcc specifies to use
to suppress thus-and-such warnings.

> But if we prefer a typedef then I'd propose 
> GenericFuncPtr like in the initial patch.

That name is OK by me.

            regards, tom lane