| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks |
| Date: | 2002-08-13 21:42:33 |
| Message-ID: | 1521.1029274953@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> In fact, I now see that there was no such problem. I do wonder why the
> 32 is there, though? Shouldn't it be 6 or something like that?
Whoever it was was too lazy to count accurately ;-)
I guess I'd vote for changing the code to be
sys = malloc(strlen(editorName) + strlen(fname) + 10 + 1);
if (!sys)
return false;
sprintf(sys, "exec '%s' '%s'", editorName, fname);
(note the added quotes to provide a little protection against spaces
and such). Then it's perfectly obvious what the calculation is doing.
I don't care about wasting 20-some bytes, but confusing readers of the
code is worth avoiding.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2002-08-13 21:45:20 | Re: Temporary Views |
| Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2002-08-13 21:25:53 | Re: Open 7.3 items |