* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Stephen Frost wrote: > > ahh, ok, that makes a bit more sense, sorry for missing it. Still makes > > me wonder why objargs gets special treatment at the top of the function > > and objnames doesn't- seems like both should be initialized either > > before being passed in (and perhaps an Assert to verify that they are), > > or they should both be initialized, but I tend to prefer just Assert'ing > > that they are correct on entry- either both are valid pointers to empty > > lists, or both NULL. > > I guess I could initialize objnames to NIL also. I initialize objargs > because that one is unused for a lot of object types (so I would have to > set it to NIL in cases where it's not used), whereas objnames is always > used and thus we know it's always initialized later. > > Maybe what I need here is just a longer comment explaining this ...
A one-line comment that it's always reset below would be sufficient for me.
Thanks for explaining it :),
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
