On 2016/12/13 1:23, Tom Lane wrote: > Fix creative, but unportable, spelling of "ptr != NULL". > > Or at least I suppose that's what was really meant here. But even > aside from the not-per-project-style use of "0" to mean "NULL", > I doubt it's safe to assume that all valid pointers are > NULL. > Per buildfarm member pademelon.
Oops, that was definitely unintentional. Thanks for fixing! Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
