Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs
Дата
Msg-id 4584.1562943879@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Ответы Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Список pgsql-docs
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
> To take into account Tom's comment, I'd suggest a middle ground by 
> commenting a public and private part explicitely in the struct, something 
> like:

>    typedef struct {
>      /* PUBLIC members to be used by callers ... */
>      ...
>      ...
>      /* PRIVATE members, not intended for external usage ... */
>      ...
>    } ... ;

One problem is that the members we've retroactively decided are "public"
are in the middle of the struct :-(.

But it occurs to me that there's no good reason we couldn't re-order the
members, as long as we only do so on HEAD and not in released versions.
That would make it a bit less inconsistent and easier to add labels
such as you suggest.

> Note: I'm probaly not a member of the pgdoc list, so the delivery may fail 
> there.

FYI, I believe the current policy is that as long as you're subscribed
to at least one PG list you can post to any of them.

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Fabien COELHO
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs
Следующее
От: Fabien COELHO
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs