Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Remove duplicated comment in get_relation_constraints

  1. duplicated comments on get_relation_constraints

    jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> — 2025-03-28T04:46:37Z

    hi.

in plancat.c, function: get_relation_constraints

```
for (i = 0; i < num_check; i++)
{
    Node       *cexpr;
    /*
      * If this constraint hasn't been fully validated yet, we must
      * ignore it here.  Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told
      * that that's safe.
      */
    if (!constr->check[i].ccvalid)
      continue;

    /*
      * NOT ENFORCED constraints are always marked as invalid, which
      * should have been ignored.
      */
    Assert(constr->check[i].ccenforced);

    /*
      * Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's safe.
      */
    if (constr->check[i].ccnoinherit && !include_noinherit)
      continue;
}
``

The first "Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's
safe." is duplicated,
also it's in the wrong place?
The second one is fine.

  2. Re: duplicated comments on get_relation_constraints

    Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> — 2025-03-28T07:52:45Z

    On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 09:47, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> hi.
>
> in plancat.c, function: get_relation_constraints
>
> ```
> for (i = 0; i < num_check; i++)
> {
>     Node       *cexpr;
>     /*
>       * If this constraint hasn't been fully validated yet, we must
>       * ignore it here.  Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told
>       * that that's safe.
>       */
>     if (!constr->check[i].ccvalid)
>       continue;
>
>     /*
>       * NOT ENFORCED constraints are always marked as invalid, which
>       * should have been ignored.
>       */
>     Assert(constr->check[i].ccenforced);
>
>     /*
>       * Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's safe.
>       */
>     if (constr->check[i].ccnoinherit && !include_noinherit)
>       continue;
> }
> ``
>
> The first "Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's
> safe." is duplicated,
> also it's in the wrong place?
> The second one is fine.
>
>

Hi! Indeed. Looks like an oversight from ca87c41. I think we can
safely remove one of those, presumably the first one.

-- 
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke

  3. Re: duplicated comments on get_relation_constraints

    Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> — 2025-03-28T10:19:04Z

    On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 4:53 PM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 09:47, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The first "Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's
> > safe." is duplicated,
> > also it's in the wrong place?
> > The second one is fine.

> Hi! Indeed. Looks like an oversight from ca87c41. I think we can
> safely remove one of those, presumably the first one.

+1.  Also there is an extra blank line after the NO INHERIT check.  I
think we can remove it while we're here.

Thanks
Richard

  4. Re: duplicated comments on get_relation_constraints

    Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> — 2025-03-28T16:38:36Z

    On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 15:19, Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 4:53 PM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 09:47, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The first "Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's
> > > safe." is duplicated,
> > > also it's in the wrong place?
> > > The second one is fine.
>
> > Hi! Indeed. Looks like an oversight from ca87c41. I think we can
> > safely remove one of those, presumably the first one.
>
> +1.  Also there is an extra blank line after the NO INHERIT check.  I
> think we can remove it while we're here.
>
> Thanks
> Richard

Sure. PFA attached, if needed
-- 
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke

  5. Re: duplicated comments on get_relation_constraints

    Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> — 2025-04-02T02:39:38Z

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 1:38 AM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 15:19, Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 4:53 PM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 09:47, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > The first "Also ignore if NO INHERIT and we weren't told that that's
> > > > safe." is duplicated,
> > > > also it's in the wrong place?
> > > > The second one is fine.

> > > Hi! Indeed. Looks like an oversight from ca87c41. I think we can
> > > safely remove one of those, presumably the first one.

> > +1.  Also there is an extra blank line after the NO INHERIT check.  I
> > think we can remove it while we're here.

> Sure. PFA attached, if needed

The change looks good to me.  I plan to push it soon, barring any
objections.

Thanks
Richard

  6. Re: duplicated comments on get_relation_constraints

    Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> — 2025-04-03T07:51:44Z

    On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 11:39 AM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
> The change looks good to me.  I plan to push it soon, barring any
> objections.

Pushed.

Thanks
Richard