Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> If we were thinking of moving in that direction, I would argue that
>> we should get rid of typedef'd pointers altogether, ie, change
>> "Relation" to be a typedef for the struct and write "Relation *rel"
>> not "Relation rel".
> Hm. I have to say the single most confusing thing about the Postgres
> source that took me a *long* time to get over was remembering that
> some of the typedefs were already pointers and some weren't.
Yeah, the lack of consistency about that is annoying.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
