On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 11:43:27AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > And before that, you'd have to get consensus that sizeof(*var) *is* > the preferred style. I for one don't like it a bit. IMO what it > mostly accomplishes is to remove a cue as to what we are allocating. > I don't agree that it removes a chance for error, either. Sure, > if you write > > foo = palloc(sizeof(typeA)) > > when foo is of type typeB*, you made a mistake --- but we know how > to get the compiler to warn about such mistakes, and indeed the > main point of the palloc_object() changes was to catch those. > However, suppose you write > > foo = palloc(sizeof(*bar)) > > I claim that's about an equally credible typo, and there is > nothing that will detect it.
Yeah, I'd prefer something where we keep track of the type, with the extra layer that enforces a cast to the type of the variable like palloc_object/array macros. The latter style of specifying a variable pointer within the sizeof is more error-prone long-term, so it's not something I think we should encourage. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
