> On 6 Mar 2023, at 15:55, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes:
>> For readers without all context, wouldn't it be better to encode in the >> function name why we're not just calling a hash like md5? Something like >> fips_allowed_hash() or similar? > > I'd prefer shorter than that --- all these queries are laid out on the > expectation of a very short function name. Maybe "fipshash()"? > > We could make the comment introducing the function declarations more > elaborate, too. fipshash() with an explanatory comments sounds like a good idea. -- Daniel Gustafsson
