Re: Using defines for protocol characters

On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 12:07:21PM -0600, Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 at 11:59, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>> I don't really like the name pattern you've chosen though; I think we
>> need to have a common prefix in the defines. Maybe prepending PQMSG_ to
>> each name would be enough. And maybe turn the _RESPONSE and _REQUEST
>> suffixes you added into prefixes as well, so instead of PARSE_REQUEST
>> you could make it PQMSG_REQ_PARSE, PQMSG_RESP_BIND_COMPLETE and so
>> on.
>>
> That becomes trivial to do now that the names are defined. I presumed
> someone would object to the names.
> I'm fine with the names you propose, but I suggest we wait to see if anyone
> objects.

I'm okay with the proposed names as well.

> + * src/include/protocol.h

Could we put these definitions in an existing header such as
src/include/libpq/pqcomm.h? I see that's where the authentication request
codes live today.

--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com