Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> I removed namecpy() altogether because you can just use struct assignment.

Makes sense, and I notice it was unused anyway.

v3 passes eyeball examination (I didn't bother running tests), with
only one remaining nit: the proposed commit message says

        They are equivalent,

which per this thread is incorrect.  Somebody might possibly refer to this
commit for guidance in updating third-party code, so I don't think we want
to leave a misleading claim here.  Perhaps something like

        They are equivalent, except that StrNCpy zero-fills the entire
        destination buffer instead of providing just one trailing zero.
        For all but a tiny number of callers, that's just overhead rather
        than being desirable.

                        regards, tom lane


Reply via email to