The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: not tested
Documentation: tested, passed
The latest patch provides the same functionality without growing the size of
struct ExprEvalStep, and without using the presence/absence of
args/variadic_args to distinguish the cases. It now uses the args field
consistently, and distinguishes the cases with new op constants,
IS_GREATEST_VARIADIC and IS_LEAST_VARIADIC, assigned at parse time. I concede
Tom's points about the comparative wartiness of the former patch.
I'll change to WoA, though, for a few loose ends:
In transformMinMaxExpr:
The assignment of funcname doesn't look right.
Two new errors are elogs. If they can be caused by user input (I'm sure the
second one can), should they not be ereports?
In fact, I think the second one should copy the equivalent one from
parse_func.c:
> ereport(ERROR,
> (errcode(ERRCODE_DATATYPE_MISMATCH),
> errmsg("VARIADIC argument must be an array"),
> parser_errposition(pstate,
> exprLocation((Node *) llast(fargs)))));
... both for consistency of the message, and so (I assume) it can use the
existing translations for that message string.
I am not sure if there is a way for user input to trigger the first one.
Perhaps it can stay an elog if not. In any case, s/to determinate/determine/.
In EvalExecMinMax:
+ if (cmpresult > 0 &&
+ (operator == IS_LEAST || operator ==
IS_LEAST_VARIADIC))
+ *op->resvalue = value;
+ else if (cmpresult < 0 &&
+ (operator == IS_GREATEST || operator
== IS_GREATEST_VARIADIC))
would it make sense to just compute a boolean isleast before entering the loop,
to get simply (cmpresult > 0 && isleast) or (cmpresult < 0 && !isleast) inside
the loop? I'm unsure whether to assume the compiler will see that opportunity.
Regards,
-Chap
The new status of this patch is: Waiting on Author
