On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Andres Freund's message of jue jun 28 14:20:59 -0400 2012:
>
>> Looks good now?
>
> The one thing I dislike about this code is the names you've chosen. I
> mean, ilist_s_stuff and ilist_d_stuff. I mean, why not just Slist_foo
> and Dlist_bar, say? As far as I can tell, you've chosen the "i" prefix
> because it's "integrated" or "inline", but this seems to me a rather
> irrelevant implementation detail that's of little use to the callers.
>
> Also, I don't find so great an idea to have everything in a single file.
> Is there anything wrong with separating singly and doubly linked lists
> each to its own file? Other than you not liking it, I mean. As a
> person who spends some time trying to untangle header dependencies, I
> would appreciate keeping stuff as lean as possible. However, since
> nobody else seems to have commented on this, maybe it's just me.
Well, it's not JUST you. I agree entirely with all of your points.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company