Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah, that's another way we could go. I had been considering a variant >> of that, which was to assign specific code values to the enum constants >> and then invent macros that did bit-anding tests on them. That ends up >> being just about what you propose except that the compiler understands >> the enum-ness of the behavioral alternatives, which seems like a good >> thing.
> Isn't that what you said not to do in > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/13345.1462383...@sss.pgh.pa.us ? No. What I'm imagining is, say, #define AGGOP_COMBINESTATES 0x1 #define AGGOP_SERIALIZESTATES 0x2 #define AGGOP_DESERIALIZESTATES 0x4 #define AGGOP_FINALIZEAGGS 0x8 typedef enum AggPartialMode { AGGPARTIAL_SIMPLE = AGGOP_FINALIZEAGGS, AGGPARTIAL_PARTIAL = AGGOP_SERIALIZESTATES, AGGPARTIAL_FINAL = AGGOP_COMBINESTATES | AGGOP_DESERIALIZESTATES | AGGOP_FINALIZEAGGS } AggPartialMode; #define DO_AGGPARTIAL_COMBINE(apm) (((apm) & AGGOP_COMBINESTATES) != 0) #define DO_AGGPARTIAL_SERIALIZE(apm) (((apm) & AGGOP_SERIALIZESTATES) != 0) #define DO_AGGPARTIAL_DESERIALIZE(apm) (((apm) & AGGOP_DESERIALIZESTATES) != 0) #define DO_AGGPARTIAL_FINALIZE(apm) (((apm) & AGGOP_FINALIZEAGGS) != 0) These enum constants satisfy the properties I mentioned before, but their assigned values are chosen to make the macros cheap. 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
