Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-02-26 16:23:12 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > >>+ if (va->string.len == vb->string.len)
> > >>+ {
> > >>+ res = memcmp(va->string.val, vb->string.val, va->string.len);
> > >>+ if (res == 0 && arg)
> > >>+ *(bool *) arg = true;
> > >Should be NULL, not 0.
> >
> > No, the compiler doesn't like that for int values.
>
> Yes, please disregard, I misread. I think I wanted actually to say that
> the test for arg should be arg != NULL, because we don't usually do
> pointer truth tests (which I personally find odd, but well).
Pointer validity tests seem to be mostly a matter of personal
preference. I know I sometimes use just "if (foo)" and other times "if
(foo != NULL)". Both idioms are used inconsistently all over the place.
We even have a PointerIsValid() macro.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
