On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 03:55:59PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2020-01-16 13:56, Robert Haas wrote: >> IMHO, custom enums for each particular case would be a big improvement >> over supposedly-generic STATUS codes. It makes it clearer which values >> are possible in each code path, and it comes out nicer in the >> debugger, too. > > Given this feedback, I would like to re-propose the original patch, attached > again here. > > After this, the use of the remaining STATUS_* symbols will be contained to > the frontend and backend libpq code, so it'll be more coherent.
I am still in a so-so state regarding this patch, but I find the
debugger argument a good one. And please don't consider me as a
blocker.
> Add a separate enum for use in the locking APIs, which were the only
> user.
> +typedef enum
> +{
> + PROC_WAIT_STATUS_OK,
> + PROC_WAIT_STATUS_WAITING,
> + PROC_WAIT_STATUS_ERROR,
> +} ProcWaitStatus;
ProcWaitStatus, and more particularly PROC_WAIT_STATUS_WAITING are
strange names (the latter refers to "wait" twice). What do you think
about renaming the enum to ProcStatus and the flags to PROC_STATUS_*?
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
