On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 10:18 PM David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't really agree that one is any more correct than the other. I > also don't think we should be making changes like this as doing this > may give some false impression that we have some standard to follow > here that a local variable of a given type must be given a certain > name. To comply with such a standard seems like it would take close to > an endless number of patches which would just result in wasted > reviewer and committer time and give us nothing but pain while back > patching. > > -1 from me.
I agree with David. This seems like pointless code churn. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
