Re: cleanup in code

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
> On 01/07/2014 05:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>>
>>> I think it will be like Andres said up thread, to stop multiple
>>> evaluations
>>> of the expression passed to the macro.
>>
>>
>> Exactly. We are not going to risk multiple evals in a macro as commonly
>> used as elog/ereport; the risk/benefit ratio is just too high.
>>
>> I don't see anything wrong with suppressing this warning by inserting
>> an additional return statement. The code is already plastered with such
>> things, from the days before we had any unreachability hints in
>> elog/ereport. And as I said upthread, there is no good reason to suppose
>> that the unreachability hints are always recognized by every compiler.
>> I take this behavior of MSVC as proof of that statement.
>
>
> Yeah, I was just surprised because I thought MSVC understood it. Committed
> the additional return statement.

Thanks for committing both the patches for cleanup.

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com