Re: get rid of Pointer type, mostly

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

To: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2025-11-24T16:09:29Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Remove no longer needed casts from Pointer
- e158fd4d68f4 19 (unreleased) landed
Remove no longer needed casts to Pointer
- c6be3daa054a 19 (unreleased) landed
Change Pointer to void *
- 1b2bb5077e9e 19 (unreleased) landed
Don't rely on pointer arithmetic with Pointer type
- 756a43689324 19 (unreleased) landed
Use more appropriate DatumGet* function
- 8c6bbd674ed8 19 (unreleased) landed
Remove useless casts to Pointer
- 623801b3bdb4 19 (unreleased) landed

Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
> In a previous thread[0], the question was asked, 'Why do we bother with 
> a "Pointer" type?'.  So I looked into get rid of it.
> There are two stages to this.  One is changing all code that wants to do 
> pointer arithmetic to use char * instead of relying on Pointer being 
> char *.  Then we can change Pointer to be void * and remove a bunch of 
> casts.

I'm in favor of that ...

> The second is getting rid of uses of Pointer for variables where you 
> might as well use void * directly.  These are actually not that many.

... but not of that.  In particular, I think it's just fine if
DatumGetPointer and PointerGetDatum take and return Pointer.

			regards, tom lane