Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vxET1-004IUS-0T for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 01:22:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vxESz-003rfs-1L for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 01:22:29 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vxESy-003rff-3B for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 01:22:29 +0000 Received: from smtp.outgoing.loopia.se ([93.188.3.37]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vxESw-000000006LV-12MA for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 01:22:28 +0000 Received: from s807.loopia.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by s807.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id A41DF58A020 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 02:22:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from s981.loopia.se (unknown [172.22.191.5]) by s807.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E25358A99A; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 02:22:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from s474.loopia.se (unknown [172.22.191.6]) by s981.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5AA22B1768; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 02:22:22 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amavis.loopia.se X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 tagged_above=-999 required=6.2 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: s474.loopia.se (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=proxel.se Received: from s934.loopia.se ([172.22.191.5]) by s474.loopia.se (s474.loopia.se [172.22.190.14]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id mQghpOliZ_-k; Tue, 3 Mar 2026 02:22:22 +0100 (CET) X-Loopia-Auth: user X-Loopia-User: andreas@proxel.se X-Loopia-Originating-IP: 147.28.75.140 Received: from [192.168.0.121] (customer-147-28-75-140.stosn.net [147.28.75.140]) (Authenticated sender: andreas@proxel.se) by s934.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9ACF7CE96C; Tue, 03 Mar 2026 02:22:21 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=proxel.se; s=loopiadkim1707418970; t=1772500942; bh=JRdy4GZ0vt4LkSsFiY2+vHVWHdfsXa9sw0nMK/KQB8o=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=qA81qYbDLOD5934HMVoyTUC43xWslInh5nUUHxBiMDNshD3PK3L1DsnmhqPot4SoY Mcz3BnWjDX3DZsKr2Dtkw8USRLHGhaoOkRs+aPLQ19lvniRT/P18eCx85GI1AByh/z 1ODaS477FcgqK8eSac5cpN1AzwLuNtcpSKigAHVs4mVy9Ee5+WVQKySvituL7iY0m+ zMOneSOGy7wCF2Gv6+w8V/5yok8u+pJ3tlt7p3L1P/WuObLArLKs9kdLrhI/N0maSh mvW6iPaN5p2xrU0OPvWNS+/VMPywnogsXd8/nq6V8uEP8fTpuKzwYtC9z+XbZmZHsd 9Yw+MBAaiG5tw== Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2026 02:22:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Use pg_icu_unicode_version(void) instead of pg_icu_unicode_version() To: Joe Conway , Chao Li , Bertrand Drouvot Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Jeff Davis References: <2E8E63C9-A2F6-4723-A937-B9F6CB34C88A@gmail.com> From: Andreas Karlsson Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On 2/27/26 3:58 PM, Joe Conway wrote: > On 2/27/26 01:04, Chao Li wrote: >> What I'm interested in is the broader policy: when reviewing >> patches, if we encounter a foo() declaration, should we consistently >> request a change to foo(void)? If yes, the standard should be >> documented somewhere. > > Perhaps here? > > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Committing_checklist Nah, I think we should just enable the warnings unless we have a good reason not to. Andreas