Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2016-04-05 11:38:27 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> The current arrangement looks bizantine to me, for no reason. If we
>> think that one of the two branches might do something additional to the
>> list deletion, surely that will be in a separate stanza with its own
>> comment; and if we ever want to remove the list deletion from one of the
>> two cases (something that strikes me as unlikely) then we will need to
>> fix the comment, too.
> You realize it's two different lists they're deleted in the different
> branches?
I looked at this and can see some of the argument on both sides, but
if it's setting off static-analyzer warnings for some people, that
seems like a sufficient reason to change it. We certainly make more
significant changes than this in order to silence warnings.
I rewrote the comment a bit more and pushed it.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
