On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié ago 18 21:32:48 -0400 2010:
>>> Here's v3.
>
>> The header comment in objectaddress.c contains a funny mistake: it says
>> it works with ObjectAddresses. However, ObjectAddresses is a different
>> type altogether, so I recommend not using that as plural for
>> ObjectAddress. Maybe "ObjectAddress objects"? :-D
>
> Alternatively, maybe ObjectAddresses was a bad choice of type name,
> and it should be ObjectAddressList or ObjectAddressArray or some such.
> But changing that might be more trouble than it's worth.
Yeah, I think it was a bad choice of type name. If I were otherwise
touching that code, I'd probably advocate for changing it, but since
I'm not, I'm inclined to just reword the comment. It might be
something to keep in mind if we ever overhaul that part of the system,
though, since at that point anything that must be back-patched will
have merge conflicts anyway.
Any other kibitzing before I commit this?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company