| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Consistently use macro HeapTupleIsValid to check the validity of tuples in tablecmds.c |
| Date: | 2025-04-09 14:23:00 |
| Message-ID: | 182145.1744208580@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
> Inconsistency is not good either though. I'm not sure it's worth the
> churn, but I could get on board a patch to actually replace all
> HeapTupleIsValid(tuple) calls with plain "tuple != NULL" checks. Keep
> HeapTupleIsValid() just for compatibility, with a comment to discourage
> using it.
Would you then advocate for also removing macros such as OidIsValid()
and PointerIsValid()? That gets into a *lot* of code churn, and
subsequent back-patching pain. We had a discussion about that
just recently IIRC, and decided not to go there.
There's also the perennial issue of whether to write
"if (foo != NULL)" or just "if (foo)". I'm not sure it's worth
trying to standardize that completely.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-04-09 14:27:42 | Build macOS shared modules as dylib rather than bundle |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-04-09 14:18:38 | Re: Possible api miuse bms_next_member |