Re: [PATCHES] use new List API names

2004-05-30 Thread Tom Lane 
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 This patch updates the remaining parts of the source tree to use the 
 new List API function names and disables the list compatibility API 
 by default. This patch compiles without warnings and passes the 
 regression tests.

I thought llast() and length() were going away too?

 This patch does not remove the usage of FastList; that should also 
 be done.

I can deal with that later ...

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Re: [PATCHES] use new List API names

2004-05-30 Thread Neil Conway 
Tom Lane wrote:
I thought llast() and length() were going away too?
For llast(), I decided to keep it around: it is nicely symmetric 
with linitial(), and it makes any code that actually needs the last 
value in a list significantly more readable. Since it's a macro 
there's no runtime cost.

I had thought about keeping length() around, but on second thought I 
don't see why we ought to. I'll replace it with list_length() and 
post an updated patch.

-Neil
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
  http://archives.postgresql.org

Re: [PATCHES] use new List API names

2004-05-30 Thread Tom Lane 
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Tom Lane wrote:
 I thought llast() and length() were going away too?

 For llast(), I decided to keep it around: it is nicely symmetric 
 with linitial(), and it makes any code that actually needs the last 
 value in a list significantly more readable. Since it's a macro 
 there's no runtime cost.

 I had thought about keeping length() around, but on second thought I 
 don't see why we ought to. I'll replace it with list_length() and 
 post an updated patch.

Okay, that works for me.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org