During a recent code review I was going to suggest that some new code would be more readable if the following: if (list_length(alist) == 0) ...
was replaced with: if (list_is_empty(alist)) ... but then I found that actually no such function exists. ~~~ Searching the PG source found many cases using all kinds of inconsistent ways to test for empty Lists: e.g.1 if (list_length(alist) > 0) e.g.2 if (list_length(alist) == 0) e.g.3 if (list_length(alist) != 0) e.g.4 if (list_length(alist) >= 1) e.g.5 if (list_length(alist) < 1) Of course, all of them work OK as-is, but by using list_is_empty all those can be made consistent and often also more readable as to the code intent. Patch 0001 adds a new function 'list_is_empty'. Patch 0002 makes use of it. Thoughts? ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
v1-0002-list_is_empty-use-the-new-function.patch
Description: Binary data
v1-0001-list_is_empty-new-function.patch
Description: Binary data
