On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 17:31 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Looks good to me, except that pg_asprintf seems to be checking ret > instead of rc.
Ah, good catch! > Is there a reason for the API discrepancy of pg_asprintf vs. psprintf? > I don't see that we use the integer return value anywhere. Callers > interested in the return value can use asprintf directly (and you have > already inserted callers that do nonstandard things using direct > asprintf). I wanted to keep pg_asprintf the same as asprintf. I think there is some value in that, but it's not supremely important. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
