Re: Another refactoring proposal: move stuff into nodes/nodeFuncs.[ch]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Another refactoring proposal: move stuff into nodes/nodeFuncs.[ch]
Date: 2008-08-27 13:40:56
Message-ID: 22496.1219844456@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2008-08-25 at 11:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The advantages of doing this would be (a) reduce the number of places
>> to look in when implementing a new node type; (b) eliminate some
>> cross-subsystem #inclusions that weaken modularity of the backend.

> Are we doing either of those things in this release?

Yes, it's done already.

> Might these changes screw up patches already in progress? Can we hold
> off making these changes until we're sure the latter isn't true?

Some patches might need small adjustments (to find the code in a
different file) but that does not strike me as an argument for not
changing things. We have applied far more invasive patches in the past
and undoubtedly will do so again in future. In any case, it's still a
long way until beta freeze, so there's plenty of time to deal with
fallout. I don't see that some other time would be better.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2008-08-27 13:51:02 Re: Is it really such a good thing for newNode() to be a macro?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-08-27 13:05:54 Re: TODO <-> Commitfest