Thank you for looking. On 2018/11/20 14:13, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 02:00:39PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: >> It seems to me that EquivalenceClass, the struct/type name, has been >> misspelled as 'EquivalenceClasses' a couple of times in the comment above >> its definition. > > EquivalenceClasses stands for the plural of EquivalenceClass. So > thinking like that... > >> - * EquivalenceClasses >> + * EquivalenceClass > > ... This is fine. > >> - * We also use EquivalenceClasses as the base structure for PathKeys, >> letting >> + * We also use EquivalenceClass as the base structure for PathKeys, letting > > ... But not that.
Hmm, I classified this one as a typo too, because the sentence calls EquivalenceClasses "the base structure for ...", whereas I think 'EquivalenceClass' is the base structure of PathKey. That said, I don't mind to using EquivalanceClasses when speaking of *instances* of EquivalenceClass, of which I see many in the source code: $ git grep EquivalenceClasses postgres_fdw.c: * Determine which EquivalenceClasses might be postgres_fdw.c: /* Get the list of interesting EquivalenceClasses. */ copyfuncs.c: /* EquivalenceClasses are never moved, so just shallow-copy copyfuncs.c: /* EquivalenceClasses are never copied, so shallow-copy the copyfuncs.c: /* EquivalenceClasses are never copied, so shallow-copy the optimizer/README:EquivalenceClasses optimizer/README:merging two existing EquivalenceClasses. At the end of <so on> But maybe I'm being overly nit-picky. :) Thanks, Amit
