On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 at 14:55, Viktor Holmberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Looking more at this, I’m quite sure that the p_is_insert field can just be 
> removed?
> See 0002.

Ah, good idea. Well spotted!

This dates back to c1ca3a1, which removed a similar p_is_update field,
but noted that using p_is_insert wasn't particularly pretty.

Going back even further, it looks like p_is_insert and p_is_update
used to be much more widely used, but now we're down to just this one
place in transformAssignedExpr() that reads p_is_insert, and as you
say, it can deduce the same information from the exprKind passed to
it, which is much neater.

Barring objections, I'll push both those shortly.

Regards,
Dean


Reply via email to