Support isEmptyStringInfo
Hi All,
We have (StringInfo::len == 0) checks at many places. I thought it
would be better to wrap that into a function isEmptyStringInfo() to
make those checks more readable and also abstract the logic to check
emptiness of a StringInfo. I think this will be useful to extensions
outside core which also have these checks. They won't need to worry
about that logic/code being changed in future; rare but not impossible
case.
Probably we should have similar support for PQExpBuffer as well, which
will be more useful to hide the internals of PQExpBuffer from client
code. But I haven't included those changes in this patch. I can do
that if hackers like the idea.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
Attachments:
0001-isEmptyStringInfo-to-check-whether-StringInfo-has-no.patchtext/x-patch; charset=US-ASCII; name=0001-isEmptyStringInfo-to-check-whether-StringInfo-has-no.patchDownload+21-12
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 8:33 AM Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote:
We have (StringInfo::len == 0) checks at many places. I thought it
would be better to wrap that into a function isEmptyStringInfo() to
make those checks more readable and also abstract the logic to check
emptiness of a StringInfo. I think this will be useful to extensions
outside core which also have these checks. They won't need to worry
about that logic/code being changed in future; rare but not impossible
case.
I think that the code is perfectly readable as it is and that this
change makes it less so.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
I think that the code is perfectly readable as it is and that this
change makes it less so.
Yeah, after a quick look through this patch I'm unimpressed too.
The new code is strictly longer, and it requires the introduction
of distracting "!" and "&" operators in many places.
regards, tom lane
At Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:13:43 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote in
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
I think that the code is perfectly readable as it is and that this
change makes it less so.Yeah, after a quick look through this patch I'm unimpressed too.
The new code is strictly longer, and it requires the introduction
of distracting "!" and "&" operators in many places.
The struct members are not private at all. In that sense StringInfo
is not a kind of class of C/Java but like a struct of C/C++ at least
to me. I think encapsulating only ".len == 0" doesn't help. Already
in many places we pull out buf.data to use it separately from buf, we
have a dozen of instances of "buf.len (<|>|<=|>=) <some length>" and
even "buf.data[buf.len - 1] == '\n'"
About read-easiness, isEmptyStringInfo(str) slightly spins my eyes
than str->len == 0.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center