From: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Typo in pg_db_role_setting.h |
Date: | 2022-08-02 04:43:19 |
Message-ID: | CAFBsxsE38jZbX4NB4DyXKgBFuektp4Jv2f-B_FSURYEtm1CnUw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 9:16 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > You are correct, but I wonder if it'd be better to just drop the comment
> > entirely. I checked a couple other random headers with function
> > declarations and they didn't have such a comment, and it's kind of
obvious
> > what they're for.
>
> Some places have these, some don't. It's probably more useful where
> a header foo.h is declaring functions that aren't in the obviously
> corresponding foo.c file, or live in multiple files. In this case
> I agree it's not adding much.
I somehow forgot that just yesterday I working on a project that will
possibly add a declaration to every catalog header for tuple deforming. In
that case, we will want to keep existing comments and possibly add more. In
the meantime, I'll go just apply the correction.
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-08-02 05:01:34 | Re: Question about user/database-level parameters |
Previous Message | Japin Li | 2022-08-02 04:34:29 | Re: Typo in pg_db_role_setting.h |