Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> writes:
> So I said that TupIsNull was not the most appropriate.
[ shrug... ] You're entitled to your opinion, but I see essentially
no value in running around and trying to figure out which TupIsNull
calls actually can see a null pointer and which never will. It'd
likely introduce bugs, it would certainly not remove any, and there's
no reason to believe that any meaningful performance improvement
could be gained.
(It's possible that the compiler can remove some of the useless
tests, so I'm satisfied to leave such micro-optimization to it.)
regards, tom lane
