"Gaetano Mendola" <mendola@bigfoot.com> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> This seems inappropriate to me. Are you going to suggest that every
>> routine that takes a pointer parameter needs to explicitly test for
>> null?
> Of course I'm not suggesting this, what I'm suggesting is put an
> assert( ) if the test can slow down the performances and an "if ( ) "
> in places that are not going to touch the performances.
I see no value at all in an assert. The code will dump core just fine
with or without an assert ...
regards, tom lane