Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes:
> When I fixed one plpgsql_check issue, I found another plpgsql issue. Now we
> have field nstatements that hold a number of plpgsql statements in
> function. Unfortunately I made an error when I wrote this functionality and
> for FOR statements, this counter is incremented 2x. Higher number than a
> real number is better than a lesser number, but it can be a source of
> problems too (inside plpgsql_check I iterate over 0 .. nstatements stmtid,
> and due this bug I had a problem with missing statements).
> Attached patch is pretty simple:
Right, done.
regards, tom lane
