On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > You could offer that paragraph as an objection to almost all Assert(), elog(), > and automated tests. Why levy it against this patch? The valuable ways > assertions and tests supplement review are well-established.
Sure, that's true, but I don't view all situations in the same way, so I don't write the same thing in answer to each one. I think I've pretty much said what I have to say about this; if nothing I wrote up until now swayed you, it's unlikely that anything else I say after this point will either. >> You may be right, but then again Tom had a different opinion, even >> after seeing your patch, and he's no dummy. > > Eh? Tom last posted to this thread before I first posted a patch. http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/29758.1451780...@sss.pgh.pa.us seems to me to be a vote against the concept embodied by the patch. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers