Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 5:11 PM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> This adds additional variants of palloc, pg_malloc, etc. that
>> encapsulate common usage patterns and provide more type safety.
> I see lots of instances where there's no explicit type-casting to the
> target variable type -
> retval = palloc(sizeof(GISTENTRY));
> Interval *p = palloc(sizeof(Interval));
> macaddr *v = palloc0(sizeof(macaddr)); and so on.
Yeah. IMO the first of those is very poor style, because there's
basically nothing enforcing that you wrote the right thing in sizeof().
The others are a bit safer, in that at least a human can note that
the two types mentioned on the same line match --- but I doubt any
compiler would detect it if they don't. Our current preferred style
Interval *p = (Interval *) palloc(sizeof(Interval));
is really barely an improvement, because only two of the three types
mentioned are going to be checked against each other.
So I think Peter's got a good idea here (I might quibble with the details
of some of these macros). But it's not really going to move the
safety goalposts very far unless we make a concerted effort to make
these be the style everywhere. Are we willing to do that? What
will it do to back-patching difficulty? Dare I suggest back-patching
these changes?
regards, tom lane
