Hi, On 2022-02-16 20:28:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2022-02-16 18:51:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> + /* Also, do nothing if the argument is OOM_result */ > >> + if (res == unconstify(PGresult *, &OOM_result)) > >> + return; > > > Wouldn't it make more sense to make res const, rather than unconstifying > > &OOM_result? > > Uh ... then we'd have to cast away the const to do free().
I was just thinking of if ((const PGresult *) res == &OOM_result) It's not important, I just find it stylistically nicer (making a pointer const from an non-const pointer is safe, the other way round not generally). - Andres
