On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 2:20 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Is it realistic we could rename red-black tree methods from 'rb_*' to e.g. > > 'rbt_*' to avoid this clash? > > That's not terribly appetizing, because it essentially means we're giving > Ruby (and potentially every other library on the planet) veto power over > our function namespace. That does not scale, especially not when the > feedback loop has a time constant measured in years :-( > > I don't have a huge objection to renaming the rbtree functions, other > than the precedent it sets ...
Maybe prefixing with pg_ would better than rb_ to rbt_. That's our semi-standard namespace prefix, I think. Of course nothing keeps somebody else from using it, too, but we can hope that they won't. It's certainly not very surprising that Ruby has symbols starting with rb_... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
