public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
To: David Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: Chao Li <[email protected]>
Cc: Postgres hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Smith <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Cleanup shadows variable warnings, round 1
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 15:51:10 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAApHDvp=rx5GxM=yW8QhFF3noXtYt7LkOxJ7zkaPOzpti4Gm8w@mail.gmail.com>
On 2026-Apr-21, David Rowley wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2026 at 19:02, Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> > PFA v8 - rebased and fixed a few new occurrences.
>
> Which of these are new to v19? Can you separate those ones out? IMO,
> we should commit at least those, as those won't cause any backpatching
> pain.
I agree. The others are v20 material.
Specifically about 0003 (v20 material for sure, as this is ancient
code), I don't like this patch very much. I wonder if it would be
possible to do away with the idea of using these codeFragment things
without introducing a performance issue here. Is that doable by turning
these macros into static functions?
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Puedes vivir sólo una vez, pero si lo haces bien, una vez es suficiente"
view thread (30+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Cleanup shadows variable warnings, round 1
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox