Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Subject: Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs
Date: 2019-07-12 15:59:56
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.21.1907121748290.8895@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs


Hello,

>> To take into account Tom's comment, I'd suggest a middle ground by
>> commenting a public and private part explicitely in the struct,
>> typedef struct {
>> /* PUBLIC members to be used by callers ... */
>> /* PRIVATE members, not intended for external usage ... */
>> } ... ;
>
> One problem is that the members we've retroactively decided are "public"
> are in the middle of the struct :-(.

Argh, I did not notice this tiny but relevant detail.

> But it occurs to me that there's no good reason we couldn't re-order the
> members, as long as we only do so on HEAD and not in released versions.
> That would make it a bit less inconsistent and easier to add labels
> such as you suggest.

Indeed. SPI-dependent extensions are likely recompiled between major
version, so a reordering should not cause significant problems.

This mean that a simple doc patch is turned into a code patch.

--
Fabien.

In response to

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-07-13 05:45:37 Re: misc doc fixes for REL_12_STABLE
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-07-12 15:04:39 Re: SPITupleTable members missing in docs