Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1obUAA-0007G0-NX for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 21:55:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1obUA9-0007MI-Km for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 21:55:17 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1obUA9-0007M9-Bk for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 21:55:17 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1obUA7-0001DV-4O for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 21:55:16 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 28MLtBVI1990815; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 17:55:11 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Geoghegan cc: David Rowley , PostgreSQL Hackers , Andres Freund Subject: Re: Making C function declaration parameter names consistent with corresponding definition names In-reply-to: References: <3913123.1663370391@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3922750.1663372191@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3955318.1663377656@sss.pgh.pa.us> <29327.1663439185@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan message dated "Thu, 22 Sep 2022 14:41:21 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1990813.1663883711.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 17:55:11 -0400 Message-ID: <1990814.1663883711@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Peter Geoghegan writes: > I would like to give another 24 hours for anybody to lodge final > objections to what I've done in this patch. It seems possible that > there will be concerns about how this might affect backpatching, or > something like that. This patch goes relatively far in the direction > of refactoring to make things consistent at the module level -- unlike > most of the patches, which largely consisted of mechanical adjustments > that were obviously correct, both locally and at the whole-module level. Yeah. I'm not much on board with the AHX->A and AH->A changes you made; those seem extremely invasive and it's not real clear that they add a lot of value. I've never thought that the Archive vs. ArchiveHandle separation in pg_dump was very well thought out. I could perhaps get behind a patch to eliminate that bit of "abstraction"; but I'd still try to avoid wholesale changes in local-variable names from it. I don't think that would buy anything that's worth the back-patching pain. Just accepting that Archive[Handle] variables might be named either AH or AHX depending on historical accident does not seem that bad to me. We have lots more and worse naming inconsistencies in our tree. regards, tom lane