Em sáb., 10 de out. de 2020 às 00:11, David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The problem is not only in nodeIncrementalSort.c, but in several others >> too, where people are using TupIsNull with ExecCopySlot. >> I would call this a design flaw. >> If (TupIsNull) >> ExecCopySlot >> >> The callers, think they are using TupIsNotNullAndEmpty. >> If (TupIsNotNullAndEmpty) >> ExecCopySlot >> > > IMO both names are problematic, too data value centric, not semantic. > TupIsValid for the name and negating the existing tests would help to at > least clear that part up. Then, things operating on invalid tuples would > be expected to know about both representations. In the case of > ExecCopySlot there is nothing it can do with a null representation of an > invalid tuple so it would have to fail if presented one. An assertion > seems sufficient. > IHMO, assertion it is not the solution. Steven suggested looking for some NULL pointer font above the calls. I say that it is not necessary, there is no NULL pointer. Whoever guarantees this is the combination, which for me is an assertion. If (TupIsNull) ExecCopySlot It works as a subject, but in release mode. It is the equivalent of: If (TupIsNull) Abort The only problem for me is that we are running this assertion on the clients' machines. regards, Ranier Vilela >
