Re: Tree-walker callbacks vs -Wdeprecated-non-prototype

On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 4:58 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> BTW, I was distressed to discover that someone decided they could
> use ExecShutdownNode as a planstate_tree_walker() walker even though
> its argument list is not even the right length. I'm a bit flabbergasted
> that we seem to have gotten away with that so far, because I'd have
> thought for sure that it'd break some platform's convention for which
> argument gets passed where. I think we need to fix that, independently
> of what we do about the larger scope of these problems. To avoid an
> API break, I propose making ExecShutdownNode just be a one-liner that
> calls an internal ExecShutdownNode_walker() function. (I've not done
> it that way in the attached, though.)

I think this was brain fade on my part ... or possibly on Amit
Kapila's part, but I believe it was probably me. I agree that it's
impressive that it actually seemed to work that way.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com