Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro
| От | Peter Eisentraut |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 8fb41a19-1d01-41fa-958a-66cce47d1e2b@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro (Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Consistently use the XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() macro
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 18.11.25 10:06, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 03:03:03PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: >> I'm currently working on the RegProcedureIsValid() and OidIsValid() cases, >> will share once done. > > here they are, I'm not creating a new thread for those as this is the same > kind of ideas (but for other types) but can create a dedicated one if you prefer. I don't like this change. RegProcedureIsValid() doesn't add any value over OidIsValid, and we don't have any RegXXXIsValid() for any of the other regxxx types. So if we were to do anything about this, I would just remove it. For OidIsValid etc., I don't think this improves the notation. It is well understood that InvalidOid is 0. I mean, some people like writing if (!foo) and some like writing if (foo == NULL), but we're not going to legislate one over the other. But we're certainly not going to introduce, uh, if (PointerIsValid(foo)), and in fact we just removed that! What you're proposing here seem quite analogous but in the opposite direction.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: