On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 9:49 PM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 12:07 AM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 2:07 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I have thought about it while doing so but I am not sure whether it is > > > a good idea or not, because before my change these all were macros > > > with 2 naming conventions so I just changed to inline function so why > > > to change the name. > > > > Well, the reason to change the name would be for consistency. It feels > > weird to have some NAMES_LIKETHIS() and other NamesLikeThis(). > > > > Now, an argument against that is that it will make back-patching more > > annoying, if any code using these functions/macros is touched. But > > since the calling sequence is changing anyway (you now have to pass a > > pointer rather than the object itself) that argument doesn't really > > carry any weight. So I would favor ClearBufferTag(), InitBufferTag(), > > etc. > > Okay, so I have renamed these 2 functions and BUFFERTAGS_EQUAL as well > to BufferTagEqual(). Just realised that this should have been BufferTagsEqual instead of BufferTagEqual I will modify this and send an updated patch tomorrow. — Dilip > -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
