Re: Declared but no defined functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal(at)pivotal(dot)io>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Declared but no defined functions
Date: 2019-07-08 19:38:13
Message-ID: 11451.1562614693@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal(at)pivotal(dot)io> writes:
> Do we wish to make this a tool and have it in src/tools, either as part of
> find_static tool after renaming that one to more generic name or
> independent script.

Well, the scripts described so far are little more than jury-rigged
hacks, with lots of room for false positives *and* false negatives.
I wouldn't want to institutionalize any of them as the right way to
check for such problems. If somebody made the effort to create a
tool that was actually trustworthy, perhaps that'd be a different
story.

(Personally I was wondering whether pgindent could be hacked up to
emit things it thought were declarations of function names. I'm
not sure that I'd trust that 100% either, but at least it would have
a better shot than the grep hacks we've discussed so far. Note in
particular that pgindent would see things inside #ifdef blocks,
whether or not your local build ever sees those declarations.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2019-07-08 19:42:23 Assertion for logically decoding multi inserts into the catalog
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2019-07-08 19:32:38 Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization