> On Feb 26, 2026, at 20:37, Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> There is at least one more place in the code where this is done.
> 

I did a search with the command: grep -RInE 
'\*[[:space:]]*[A-Za-z_][A-Za-z0-9_]*\[0\]' src contrib --include='*.c'

Excluding irrelevant results, there are 3 more occurrences:

1 - contrib/basic_archive/basic_archive.c line 105
```
        if (*newval == NULL || *newval[0] == '\0')
                return true;
```

Here, the code checks *newval first, which implies that the subsequent 
*newval[0] is unintentional syntax.

2 - src/interfaces/ecpg/pgtypeslib/interval.c line 62
```
int
DecodeInterval(char **field, int *ftype, int nf,        /* int range, */
                           int *dtype, struct /* pg_ */ tm *tm, fsec_t *fsec)
{
  ...
        if (IntervalStyle == INTSTYLE_SQL_STANDARD && *field[0] == '-')
        {
                /* Check for additional explicit signs */
                bool            more_signs = false;

                for (i = 1; i < nf; i++)
                {
                        if (*field[i] == '-' || *field[i] == '+')
                        {
                                more_signs = true;
                                break;
                        }
                }
```

3 - src/backend/utils/adt/datatime.c line 3522
```
int
DecodeInterval(char **field, int *ftype, int nf, int range,
                           int *dtype, struct pg_itm_in *itm_in)
{
 ...
        if (IntervalStyle == INTSTYLE_SQL_STANDARD && nf > 0 && *field[0] == 
'-')
        {
                force_negative = true;
                /* Check for additional explicit signs */
                for (i = 1; i < nf; i++)
                {
                        if (*field[i] == '-' || *field[i] == '+')
                        {
                                force_negative = false;
                                break;
                        }
                }
        }
```

Where 2&3 makes this patch more interesting.

Both occurrences are inside functions named DecodeInterval. For non-zero i, the 
code also performs *field[i]:

Given this code has been there for years, I don’t believe it is a bug. I 
checked the callers of DecodeInterval in both files and found that field is 
defined as:
```
    char *field[MAXDATEFIELDS];
```

This explains why *field[i] works; it is doing the intended thing by getting 
the first character of the string at array position i.

However, since the precedence between the [] and * operators frequently 
confuses people, I suggest adding parentheses to make the intention explicit as 
*(field[i]). Furthermore, I think we should change the function signatures to 
use the type char *field[] to reflect the actual type the functions expect. If 
a caller were to pass a true char ** typed field to DecodeInterval, the current 
logic would result in a bug.

See the attached diff for my suggested changes.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/




Attachment: nocfbot.diff
Description: Binary data

Reply via email to