Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> Yea, it'd be more convincing. I'm not convinced it'd be a no-brainer
> though. Unless you've been hacking PG for a fair bit, the pg_list.h APIs
> are very hard to understand / remember. Given this change essentially
> requires auditing all code that uses List, ISTM we'd be much better off
> also changing the API at the same time. Yes that'll mean there'll be
> vestigial uses nobody bothered to convert in extension etc, but that's
> not that bad.
The pain factor for back-patching is alone a strong reason for not just
randomly replacing the List API with different spellings.
regards, tom lane
