On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 11:54:51AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 09:16:47PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote: >> Unless I'm missing something both can be handled using pg_node_attr() >> annotations that already exists? > > Indeed, that should work for the locators.
My mistake here. When it comes to the locations to silence in the normalization, we already rely on the variable name "location" of type int in gen_node_support.pl, so we can just do the same for the code generating the jumbling. This stuff still needs two more pg_node_attr() to be able to work: one to ignore a full Node in the jumbling and a second that can be used on a per-field basis. Once this is in place, automating the generation of the code is not that complicated, most of the work is to get around placing the pg_node_attr() so as the jumbling gets things right. The number of fields to mark as things to ignore depends on the Node type (heavy for Const, for example), but I'd like to think that a "ignore" approach is better than an "include" approach so as new fields would be considered by default in the jumble compilation. I have not looked at all the edge cases, so perhaps more attrs would be needed.. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
