Re: Remove unused function parameters, part 2: replication

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 04:32:09PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 06:49:25AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > We can still continue to fix them when we cross them "accidentally".
> > 
> > That said, it somehow sounds weird to wait to cross them accidentally knowing we
> > have the tool to find them, so I'm still not convinced that just ignoring them
> > is the right thing to do.
> 
> There are a couple of concepts that usually come in the balance here.
> For example, in some cases, we may not want to remove function
> arguments because it can make API definitions more consistent across
> the board, aka leaner for the reader.

Yeah, I got this point. The "not convinced" above was related to the general
case (not the API related one).

> It may be also possible that
> having these function arguments lying around could help in future
> backpatches, not to mention that it reduces the chances of conflicts.

I'm not sure I agree with it: just keeping unused parameters in case of
backpatches. I mean how could we predict that the ones that have been removed
in the commits I mentioned above will not produce conflicts?

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com