On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:51:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Brendan Jurd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > char * text_cstring(const text *t) > > What do people think of text_to_cstring?
I tend to put things the other way around in my code, i.e: char * cstring_of_text(const text *t) mainly because things read more easily---type definitions of new variables are next to the first part of the word. char * str = cstring_of_text(src_text); vs. char * str = text_to_cstring(src_text); I think I got my original inspiration for doing it this way around from the Caml language. Sam -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
