Marko Grujic <[email protected]> writes:
>> Would "endptr == nnn" be more direct here? That checks whether no
>> conversion occurred, as described in the quoted doc.
> Agreed, that would be more direct, with one caveat (which
> admittedly doesn't apply today),
> and that is that the endptr-not-at-NUL-byte variant also safe-guards
> against trailing-junk (which Tom mentioned).
Yeah, so I think it's better to use the "*endptr == '\0'" variant.
There's a pretty fair number of other places in our tree that do it
like that, and the ones that don't are mostly explicitly allowing
trailing text.
Pushed.
regards, tom lane
