Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of lun ago 01 16:12:56 -0400 2011: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Kohei KaiGai's message of dom jul 31 02:21:55 -0400 2011: > >> 2011/7/29 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > > > >> > It would likely be better to not expose the struct type, just individual > >> > lookup functions. > >> > > >> If so, individual functions to expose a certain property of the supplied > >> object type should be provided. > >> > >> int get_object_property_catid_oidlookup(ObjectType); > >> int get_object_property_catid_namelookup(ObjectType); > >> Oid get_object_property_relation_id(ObjectType); > >> AttrNumber get_object_property_nameattnum(ObjectType); > >> AttrNumber get_object_property_namespacenum(ObjectType); > >> AttrNumber get_object_property_ownershipnum(ObjectType); > > > > Maybe a single lookup function that receives pointers that the lookup > > routine can fill with the appropriate information; allowing for a NULL > > pointer in each, meaning caller is not interested in that property. > > That seems like a lot of extra notational complexity for no particular > benefit. Every time someone wants to add a new property to this > array, they're going to have to touch every caller, and all > third-party code using this interface will have to be rejiggered.
So add a bunch of macros on top for the two or three (five?) most common cases -- say those that occur 3 times or more. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
