From: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: useless assignment pointer argument |
Date: | 2015-05-28 20:42:37 |
Message-ID: | CAJycT5o4iL+1JwzkwyUfv9YVYiPOCzO1b2O+auxp-Zq93DzKjw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
If the compiler is good the assignment is elided indeed, that's not what I
meant to point out.
On Thu, 28 May 2015 at 22:17 Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-05-28 20:14:33 +0000, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
> > src/backend/commands/explain.c:1692
> > src/backend/commands/explain.c:1874
> > src/backend/commands/explain.c:1986
> >
> > there is the following assignment:
> >
> > ancestors = list_delete_first(ancestors);
> >
> > but it has no effect at all being that a function parameter and not used
> > anymore after the assignment itself.
>
> So? It costs little to nothing, and it'll make it much less likely that
> a stale version of 'ancestors' is used when the code is expanded.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2015-05-28 20:42:54 | Re: psql tabcomplete - minor bugfix - tabcomplete for SET ROLE TO xxx |
Previous Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2015-05-28 20:35:17 | Re: Possible pointer dereference |