Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> No, version 2 of the patch used the strchr() technique and has >> *zero* new functions and *zero* new macros. > > Right. I was referring to the non-strchr() approach in the > initial patch. I'm sorry that I misunderstood you. So, I don't think I've heard any argument against version 2 of this patch. Does anyone oppose this version? Is any committer willing to commit it? I'm not sure there's much point putting it into the CF application, since in spot-checks of object files I thought were most likely to be affected, I found that identical object code was generated. It seems to be strictly a matter of whether the code is more or less readily understood with the patch applied. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
