Re: Tweaking ResolveNew's API

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> A possible objection to this is that most C compilers wouldn't complain
>> if a call site is still trying to use the old convention of passing a
>> CmdType value. In the core code, there are only four call sites and
>> three are in rewriteHandler.c itself, so this isn't much of a problem
>> --- but if there's any third-party code such as FDWs that's trying to
>> make use of this function for querytree manipulation, there'd be a risk
>> of failing to notice the need to update the call.

> Failing to notice such changes is easy if the compiler doesn't even
> issue a warning, so *some* way to have old code fail (even better if
> it's a hard error and not just a warning) would be nice. I'm not sure I
> have useful suggestions on how to do it, though, just a +1 to doing it.

Actually, it occurs to me that there's a really easy way to get the
result: let's just rename the function. ResolveNew isn't an amazingly
mnemonic name anyway. How about ReplaceVarsFromTargetList?

regards, tom lane