Thank you for looking.
On 2018/11/20 14:13, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 02:00:39PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> It seems to me that EquivalenceClass, the struct/type name, has been
>> misspelled as 'EquivalenceClasses' a couple of times in the comment above
>> its definition.
>
> EquivalenceClasses stands for the plural of EquivalenceClass. So
> thinking like that...
>
>> - * EquivalenceClasses
>> + * EquivalenceClass
>
> ... This is fine.
>
>> - * We also use EquivalenceClasses as the base structure for PathKeys, letting
>> + * We also use EquivalenceClass as the base structure for PathKeys, letting
>
> ... But not that.
Hmm, I classified this one as a typo too, because the sentence calls
EquivalenceClasses "the base structure for ...", whereas I think
'EquivalenceClass' is the base structure of PathKey. That said, I don't
mind to using EquivalanceClasses when speaking of *instances* of
EquivalenceClass, of which I see many in the source code:
$ git grep EquivalenceClasses
postgres_fdw.c: * Determine which EquivalenceClasses might be
postgres_fdw.c: /* Get the list of interesting EquivalenceClasses. */
copyfuncs.c: /* EquivalenceClasses are never moved, so just shallow-copy
copyfuncs.c: /* EquivalenceClasses are never copied, so shallow-copy the
copyfuncs.c: /* EquivalenceClasses are never copied, so shallow-copy the
optimizer/README:EquivalenceClasses
optimizer/README:merging two existing EquivalenceClasses. At the end of
<so on>
But maybe I'm being overly nit-picky. :)
Thanks,
Amit