On 07/18/2014 10:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
>> I am not opposed to moving the contrib code into core in the manner
>> that you oppose. I don't feel strongly either way.
>>
>> I noticed in passing that your revision says this *within* levenshtein.c:
>>
>> + * Guaranteed to work with Name datatype's cstrings.
>> + * For full details see levenshtein.c.
> Yeah, I looked at what I produced yesterday night again and came
> across a couple of similar things :) And reworked a couple of things
> in the version attached, mainly wordsmithing and adding comments here
> and there, as well as making the naming of the Levenshtein functions
> in core the same as the ones in fuzzystrmatch 1.0.
>
>> I imagined that when a committer picked this up, an executive decision
>> would be made one way or the other. I am quite willing to revise the
>> patch to alter this behavior at the request of a committer.
> Fine for me. I'll move this patch to the next stage then.
There are a bunch of compiler warnings:
parse_relation.c: In function ‘errorMissingColumn’:
parse_relation.c:3114:447: warning: ‘closestcol1’ may be used
uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
parse_relation.c:3066:8: note: ‘closestcol1’ was declared here
parse_relation.c:3129:29: warning: ‘closestcol2’ may be used
uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
parse_relation.c:3067:8: note: ‘closestcol2’ was declared here
levenshtein.c: In function ‘levenshtein_common’:
levenshtein.c:107:6: warning: unused variable ‘start_column_local’
[-Wunused-variable]
- Heikki