Re: New "single-call SRF" APIs are very confusingly named

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 7:41 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 05:09:46PM -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > To summarize, I am in support of renaming SetSingleFuncCall() ->
> > InitMaterializedSRF() and SRF_SINGLE_USE_EXPECTED ->
> > MAT_SRF_USE_EXPECTED_TUPLE_DESC (or just DESC) as suggested elsewhere in
> > this thread. And I think we should eventually consider renaming the
> > multi* function names and consider if ExprSingleResult is a good name.
>
> As already mentioned, these have been around for years, so the impact
> would be bigger.


That makes sense.


> Attached is a patch for HEAD and REL_15_STABLE to
> switch this stuff with new names, with what's needed for ABI
> compatibility.  My plan would be to keep the compatibility parts only
> in 15, and drop them from HEAD.
>

- * SetSingleFuncCall
+ * Compatibility function for v15.
+ */
+void
+SetSingleFuncCall(FunctionCallInfo fcinfo, bits32 flags)
+{
+ InitMaterializedSRF(fcinfo, flags);
+}
+

 Any reason not to use a macro?

- Melanie