Re: Using defines for protocol characters

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Using defines for protocol characters
Date: 2023-08-09 16:51:47
Message-ID: 20230809165147.GA1385791@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 10:44:42AM -0600, Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 at 10:34, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I agree with Peter: let's use the names in the protocol document
>> with a single prefix. I've got mixed feelings about whether that prefix
>> should have an underscore, though.
>
> Well, we're getting closer :)

I'm +0.5 for the underscore.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2023-08-09 16:54:12 Re: Use of additional index columns in rows filtering
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2023-08-09 16:44:42 Re: Using defines for protocol characters