On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 2:14 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> One further caveat here is that I seem to need to set "IgnoreMacros:
> false" to get perfect results for the "inconsistent" check when the C
> preprocessor is involved, as it often is (e.g., with TransactionId
> params).
Actually that expla
On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 2:01 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> That's kind of annoying --- seems to put a serious crimp in any plans
> to check this mechanically.
I don't see why it should make a huge difference. Granted we can't
really rely on the "readability-named-parameter" check in the way we'd
hoped, bu
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> I see what happened here: while the
> "readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name" check works
> equally well with extern functions and functions with local linkage,
> the same cannot be said for the "readability-named-parameter" check.
> The latter only seems to
On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 10:00 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I actually noticed that clang-tidy missed this one myself, shortly
> after commit. I still haven't figured out why, but it seems like it
> might be a bug in the readability-named-parameter check. Could also
> have something to do with my cl
On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 9:47 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> ReorderBufferAssignChild is better, but ReorderBufferCommitChild is still
> short some parameter names.
I actually noticed that clang-tidy missed this one myself, shortly
after commit. I still haven't figured out why, but it seems like it
might be
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> Harmonize reorderbuffer parameter names.
I'm confused about this, because it didn't fix the (ahem) poster-child
case?
-extern void ReorderBufferAssignChild(ReorderBuffer *, TransactionId,
TransactionId, XLogRecPtr commit_lsn);
-extern void ReorderBufferCommitChild(Reor
