Re: [RFC] Common object property boards

Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of lun ago 08 12:18:47 -0400 2011:
> 2011/8/8 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> > We could do that, but what the heck is the point?   What benefit are
> > we trying to get by not returning a pointer to the structure?  I feel
> > like we're making this ludicrously complicated with no real
> > justification of why all of this complexity is adding any value.
> >
> I agree with Robert's opinion. It seems to me we have little benefit to
> keep the structure condidential to other components.

So you coded my suggestion in an extremely awkward way just to be able
to dismiss it?

We use that pattern in a lot of places. See get_op_opfamily_properties
for the first example I found (took my 15 secs to find it). I don't
understand why you think it's so complicated or horrible.

Please tell me, why don't we just return Form_pg_amop in that function?

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support