Horton

Re: designated initializers

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, Yura Sokolov <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-08-10T16:56:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Hi,

On 2022-08-10 16:03:00 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> (Coming from https://postgr.es/m/20220809193616.5uucf33piwdxn452@alvherre.pgsql )
> 
> On 2022-Aug-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> 
> > On 2022-Aug-09, Andres Freund wrote:
> > 
> > > Mildly wondering whether we ought to use designated initializers instead,
> > > given we're whacking it around already. Too easy to get the order wrong when
> > > adding new members, and we might want to have optional callbacks too.
> > 
> > Strong +1.  It makes code much easier to navigate (see XmlTableRoutine
> > and compare with heapam_methods, for example).
> 
> For example, I propose the attached.

+1 I've fought with this one when fixing a conflict when rebasing a patch...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Commits

  1. struct PQWalReceiverFunctions: use designated initializers