On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 1:46 AM Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As there is consensus to keep the no-op assignment,
> I will go ahead and reject the patch.
>
In your patch you suggest removing two assignments, and we only have
consensus to keep one of them. The other one is an obvious no-op.
I attached a patch that removes only one assignment. Could you please try
it and check whether Coverity is still complaining about need_recordsep
variable?
Best regards,
Karina Litskevich
Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com/
From 92c86657181c13c48a4b4176bf4ad1d6221cf9b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Karina Litskevich <litskevichkar...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:43:44 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v2] Avoid unused value in print.c
---
src/fe_utils/print.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/fe_utils/print.c b/src/fe_utils/print.c
index 7af1ccb6b5..d10f33cd9f 100644
--- a/src/fe_utils/print.c
+++ b/src/fe_utils/print.c
@@ -484,10 +484,7 @@ print_unaligned_text(const printTableContent *cont, FILE *fout)
for (f = footers; f; f = f->next)
{
if (need_recordsep)
- {
print_separator(cont->opt->recordSep, fout);
- need_recordsep = false;
- }
fputs(f->data, fout);
need_recordsep = true;
}
--
2.34.1
