On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 2:20 PM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:01 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks! The v5 patch looks good to me. Let's see if all agree on the > > > > > goto duplicate_error approach which could reduce the LOC by ~80. > > > > > > > > I think the "goto duplicate_error" approach looks good, it avoids > > > > duplicating the same error code multiple times. > > > > > > Thanks. I will mark the v5 patch "ready for committer" if no one has > > > comments. > > > > Hi, > > > > I looked into the patch and noticed a minor thing. > > > > + return; /* keep compiler quiet */ > > } > > > > I think we do not need the comment here. > > The compiler seems not require "return" at the end of function > > when function's return type is VOID. > > > > In addition, it seems better to remove these "return;" like what > > commit "3974c4" did. > > It looks like that commit removed the plain return statements for a > void returning functions. I see in the code that there are return > statements that are there right after ereport(ERROR, just to keep the > compiler quiet. Here in this patch also, we have return; statements > after ereport(ERROR, for void returning functions. I'm not sure > removing them would cause some compiler warnings on some platforms > with some other compilers. If we're not sure, I'm okay to keep those > return; statements. Thoughts?
I felt we could retain the return statement and remove the comments. If you are ok with that I will modify and post a patch for it. Thoughts? Regards, Vignesh
