On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 12:33 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > Maybe we don't really need the word "tuple". Like we could just make > > it slot_store_heap() or SlotStoreHeap(). A slot can only store a > > tuple, after all. > > I don't think it's wise to think of these things as just "slots"; > that name is way too generic. They are "tuple slots", and so that > word has to stay in the relevant function names.
I suppose there is some potential for confusion with things like logical replication slots, but I think that these are the most widely-used type of slot in the backend, so it's not entirely crazy to think that they deserve a bit of special consideration. I'm not violently opposed to using four words instead of three (slot_store_heap_tuple vs. slot_store_heap) but to really spell out the operation in full you'd need to say something like HeapTupleTableSlotStoreHeapTuple, and I think that's pretty unwieldy for what's likely to end up being a very common programming idiom. It's not crazy that we type 'cd' to change directories rather than 'chdir' or 'change_directory'. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company