Mark Dilger <markdil...@yahoo.com> writes:
> The mechanism that occurs to me (and I'm not wedded to
> this idea) is:

> typedef uint8 T_HOFF_TYPE;
> typedef struct xl_heap_header
> {
>         uint16          t_infomask2;
>         uint16          t_infomask;
>         T_HOFF_TYPE             t_hoff;
> } xl_heap_header;

> #define SizeOfHeapHeader        (offsetof(xl_heap_header, t_hoff) + 
> sizeof(T_HOFF_TYPE))

Meh.  That does nothing for the "add a field in the wrong place" risk.
Yes, it would prevent people from changing the type of t_hoff without
updating the macro --- but I'm not convinced that defending against that
alone is worth any notational pain.  If you're changing t_hoff's type
without looking fairly closely at every reference to t_hoff, you're
practicing unsafe programming to begin with.

I wonder though if we could invent a macro that produces the sizeof
a struct field, and then use that in macros like this.  Something like

#define field_sizeof(typename, fieldname) \
        sizeof(((typename *) NULL)->fieldname)

Compare the default definition of offsetof ...

                        regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to