Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >>> OK, that removes comment duplication. Also, what about replacing >>> "bit(s)" by "one or more bits" in the comment terms where

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> OK, that removes comment duplication. Also, what about replacing >> "bit(s)" by "one or more bits" in the comment terms where adapted? >> That's bikeshedding, but that's what this patch is about. > > Translating

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Alvaro Herrera writes: >>> Regarding the first hunk, I don't like these INTERFACE sections too >>> much; they get

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: >> Regarding the first hunk, I don't like these INTERFACE sections too >> much; they get seriously outdated over the time and aren't all that >> helpful anyway. See the one on

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

Alvaro Herrera writes: > Regarding the first hunk, I don't like these INTERFACE sections too > much; they get seriously outdated over the time and aren't all that > helpful anyway. See the one on heapam.c for example. I'd rather get > rid of that one instead of

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > I just bumped into a couple of things in visibilitymap.c: > - visibilitymap_clear clears all bits of a visibility map, its header > comment mentions the contrary > - The header of visibilitymap.c mentions correctly "a bit" when > referring to setting them, but

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

At Thu, 7 Jul 2016 16:48:00 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI > wrote: > > So, the 'pinned' is not necessary here or

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > So, the 'pinned' is not necessary here or should be added also to > _clear. I think the former is preferable since it is already > written in the comments for the functions and seems to be a bit > too

Re: [HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

Hello, At Wed, 6 Jul 2016 11:28:19 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in > I just bumped into a couple of things in visibilitymap.c: > - visibilitymap_clear clears all bits of a visibility map, its header

[HACKERS] Header and comments describing routines in incorrect shape in visibilitymap.c

Hi all, I just bumped into a couple of things in visibilitymap.c: - visibilitymap_clear clears all bits of a visibility map, its header comment mentions the contrary - The header of visibilitymap.c mentions correctly "a bit" when referring to setting them, but when clearing, it should say that