On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 6:20 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I think they're easily Stroustrup's worst idea ever. You're basically > throwing away an opportunity for documentation, and that documentation > is often sorely needed.
He could at least point to C++ pure virtual functions, where omitting a parameter name in the base class supposedly conveys useful information. I don't find that argument particularly convincing myself, even in a C++ context, but at least it's an argument. Doesn't apply here in any case. > I'd view the current state of reorderbuffer.h as pretty unacceptable on > stylistic grounds no matter which position you take. Having successive > declarations randomly using named or unnamed parameters is seriously > ugly and distracting, at least to my eye. We don't need such blatant > reminders of how many cooks have stirred this broth. I'll come up with a revision that deals with that too, then. Shouldn't be too much more work. I suppose that I ought to backpatch a fix for the really egregious issue in hba.h, and leave it at that on stable branches. -- Peter Geoghegan
