From: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: log_heap_visible(): remove unused parameter and update comment |
Date: | 2022-09-30 14:18:17 |
Message-ID: | MEYP282MB1669DA5AE4A3EAA8151BA8CBB6569@MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 at 22:09, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 7:30 PM Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> When I try to use -Wunused-parameter, I find there are many warnings :-( .
>
> Great!
>
> I think we can't just remove every unused parameter, for instance, it
> makes sense to retain PlannerInfo *root parameter even though it's not
> used now, in future it may be. But if the parameter is of type
> unrelated to the context of the function, like the one committed
> 65b158ae4e892c2da7a5e31e2d2645e5e79a0bfd and like the proposed patch
> to some extent, it could be removed.
>
> Others may have different thoughts here.
Maybe we can define a macro like UNUSED(x) for those parameters, and
call this macro on the parameter that we might be useful, then
we can use -Wunused-parameter when compiling. Any thoughts?
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey Chudnovsky | 2022-09-30 14:47:34 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |
Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2022-09-30 14:09:36 | Re: log_heap_visible(): remove unused parameter and update comment |