Re: Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1844517.1651502932@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Refactor construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for built-in types
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> There are many calls to construct_array() and deconstruct_array() for
> built-in types, for example, when dealing with system catalog columns.
> These all hardcode the type attributes necessary to pass to these functions.
> To simplify this a bit, add construct_array_builtin(),
> deconstruct_array_builtin() as wrappers that centralize this hardcoded
> knowledge. This simplifies many call sites and reduces the amount of
> hardcoded stuff that is spread around.
> I also considered having genbki.pl generate lookup tables for these
> hardcoded values, similar to schemapg.h, but that ultimately seemed
> excessive.
+1 --- the added overhead of the switch statements is probably a
reasonable price to pay for the notational simplification and
bug-proofing.
One minor coding gripe is that compilers that don't know that elog(ERROR)
doesn't return will certainly generate "use of possibly-uninitialized
variable" complaints. Suggest inserting "return NULL;" or similar into
the default: cases. I'd also use more specific error wording to help
people find where they need to add code when they make use of a new type;
maybe like "type %u not supported by construct_array_builtin".
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: