Re: still use IndexIsValid() etc. macros?

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> In another patch discussion it was brought up why the patch doesn't use
> the IndexIsValid() etc. macros.

> They are defined thus:

> /*
>  * Use of these macros is recommended over direct examination of the state
>  * flag columns where possible; this allows source code compatibility with
>  * the hacky representation used in 9.2.
>  */
> #define IndexIsValid(indexForm) ((indexForm)->indisvalid)
> #define IndexIsReady(indexForm) ((indexForm)->indisready)
> #define IndexIsLive(indexForm)  ((indexForm)->indislive)

> I don't see them used consistently.  Obviously, some low-level code
> needs to bypass them, but it's hard to see where to draw the line.  Is
> it worth keeping these?  Is there still code that maintains
> compatibility with 9.2 from a single source?

We have a general problem with people ignoring accessor macros;
it's hardly limited to these.  The relcache accessor macros such as
RelationGetDescr, for instance, tend to get bypassed.  I'm not sure
how worthwhile it is to be picky about that.

I agree that now that 9.2 is a year out of support, there's not
too much value in the original cross-branch-compatibility argument
for these particular macros.

			regards, tom lane