On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >>> It seems a bit strange to have all the rb_free_recursive support and not >>> use it anywhere ... and a freefunc callback even, whose only caller >>> seems to set as null currently. Hmm, even in the knngist patch the >>> rb_freefunc stuff is unused. > >> I don't think it's inappropriate; it doesn't seem implausible that >> someone might want to free an rbtree someday. I suppose we could >> comment it out but I guess I don't see the point. > > I think the suggestion was to *remove* it not comment it out. I'm > skeptical of carrying dead code. If the functionality is not used > in the proposed gist patches then it's very fair to question whether > it ever will be used.
I don't think the question is unfair; I just don't happen to agree with the conclusion. But I don't care enough to argue about it either... ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
