On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:49 AM Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Em sex., 27 de mar. de 2020 às 20:49, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu: >> >> Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> writes: >> > Can someone check if there is a copy and paste error, at file: >> > \usr\backend\commands\analyze.c, at lines 2225 and 2226? >> > int num_mcv = stats->attr->attstattarget; >> > int num_bins = stats->attr->attstattarget; >> >> No, that's intentional I believe. Those are independent variables >> that just happen to start out with the same value. > > Neither you nor I can say with 100% certainty that the original author's > intention.
Given that Tom is the original author, I think it's a lot more likely that he knows what the original authors intention was. It's certainly been a few years, so it probably isn't 100%, but the likelihood is pretty good. >> > To silence this alert. >> >> If you have a tool that complains about that coding, I think the >> tool needs a solid whack upside the head. There's nothing wrong >> with the code, and it clearly expresses the intent, which the other >> way doesn't. (Or in other words: it's the compiler's job to >> optimize away the duplicate fetch. Not the programmer's.) > > I completely disagree. My tools have proven their worth, including finding > serious errors in the code, which fortunately have been fixed by other > committers. > When issuing this alert, the tool does not value judgment regarding > performance or optimization, but it does an excellent job of finding similar > patterns in adjacent lines, and the only thing it asked for was to be asked > if this was really the case. original author's intention. All tools will give false positives. This simply seems one of those -- it certainly could have been indicating a problem, but in this case it didn't. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/
