Re: Consistently use macro HeapTupleIsValid to check the validity of tuples in tablecmds.c
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Consistently use macro HeapTupleIsValid to check the validity of tuples in tablecmds.c |
Дата | |
Msg-id | bccf2803-5252-47c2-9ff0-340502d5bd1c@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Consistently use macro HeapTupleIsValid to check the validity of tuples in tablecmds.c (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Consistently use macro HeapTupleIsValid to check the validity of tuples in tablecmds.c
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/04/2025 17:23, Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes: >> Inconsistency is not good either though. I'm not sure it's worth the >> churn, but I could get on board a patch to actually replace all >> HeapTupleIsValid(tuple) calls with plain "tuple != NULL" checks. Keep >> HeapTupleIsValid() just for compatibility, with a comment to discourage >> using it. > > Would you then advocate for also removing macros such as OidIsValid() > and PointerIsValid()? That gets into a *lot* of code churn, and > subsequent back-patching pain. We had a discussion about that > just recently IIRC, and decided not to go there. PointerIsValid is pretty pointless, I think I'd be in favor of eliminating that. OidIsValid() is a little more sensible. If you write "oid != InvalidOid", that reads as a double negative, "is oid not invalid". But yeah, probably not worth the churn. > There's also the perennial issue of whether to write > "if (foo != NULL)" or just "if (foo)". I'm not sure it's worth > trying to standardize that completely. Agreed. I use both, depending on which mood I'm in. -- Heikki Linnakangas Neon (https://neon.tech)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: