Re: linked list rewrite

Neil Conway wrote:
> (1) API naming
> 
> In the latest prototype implementation, I've adopted a completely new 
> naming convention for the functions in the list API. The new API looks 
> like:
> 
> List *list_append(List *list, void *datum);
> List *list_prepend(List *list, void *datum);
> List *list_conc(List *list1, List *list2);
> bool list_member(List *list, void *datum);
> List *list_remove(List *list, void *datum);
> etc.
> 
> Function variants which operate on integer lists (type = T_IntList) 
> have an "_int" suffix, whereas OID list functions use an "_oid" suffix. 
> By default, list operations use structural equality (i.e. equal()) -- 
> if a list function uses pointer equality to determine if two list 
> elements are the same, it has the "_simple" suffix. And so on.
> 
> In contrast, the existing List API is a lot more inconsistent (IMHO). I 
> elaborated on some of the deficiencies of the existing API naming 
> scheme here:
> 
>      http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-01/msg00188.php
> 
> Tom objected to changing the names:
> 
>       http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-01/msg00186.php
>       http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-01/msg00191.php

I agree a renaming of list functions is good.  If we had kept the
original Berkeley code as-is, we would have a lot fewer developers
today.  :-)  Making drastic cleanups is often worthwile.  I write
backend code and still can't remember which list function does what, so
clearer naming would help me a lot, and I am sure others too.

Tom had the idea of making compatible names for the old macros, and I
think that is an excellent compromise.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073