> I think this is a waste of time. These functions are already very > short; making them shorter will not significantly improve readability. > It'll just force people who think they know what that code does to > look at it again to see if it still does the same thing. > > Let's spend our time arguing about changes that matter. There are an > infinite number of things like this that you could tinker with, but > most of them are not worth tinkering with.
I must respectfully disagree. Granted, this is not a big issue and we don't have to fix it right now. Probably next commit fest would be a better time. But this is not a huge patch that changing everything in unpredictable way and requires a lot of hard thinking. We also have code review, regression tests, alpha and beta tests to be reasonably sure that such change doesn't break anything. (If not perhaps we should improve this situation by introducing new ways of modular and property-based testing, which I believe would be extremely useful say in case of indexes, but this is a different story). I don't believe we can afford to keep such a confusing code using provided arguments as an excuse not to fixing it. ("OK, there are two procedures that work differently... lets see... or not? well, thats odd... lets make :vsplit and compare them line by line... damn, I spend all that time to figure out that they are the same!") Otherwise such "broken windows" will accumulate until it become a _real_ problem. As we know from experience, to that time it's usually much harder to fix anything than it is now. -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev http://eax.me/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers