Re: Using defines for protocol characters

Dave Cramer <davecramer@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 12:59, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> PqMsgEmptyQueryResponse or something like that seems better, if we
>> want to keep the current capitalization. I'm not a huge fan of the way
>> we vary our capitalization conventions so much all over the code base,
>> but I think we would at least do well to keep it consistent from one
>> end of a certain identifier to the other.

> I don't have a strong preference, but before I make the changes I'd like to
> get consensus.
> Can we vote or whatever it takes to decide on a naming pattern that is
> acceptable ?

I'm good with Robert's proposal above.

			regards, tom lane