Re: improve FOUND in PL/PgSQL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: improve FOUND in PL/PgSQL
Date: 2002-08-14 23:10:34
Message-ID: 17348.1029366634@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> writes:
>> I think you could do this
>> much more cleanly by introducing a local boolean:

> Ah, ok -- thanks for the suggestion. It required a fair amount of
> work, since I had to refactor a lot of the logic in the 3 functions
> that handle PL/PgSQL FOR loops.

Then you're still doing it the hard way: all you need is to do
exec_set_found(found) immediately before anyplace that's going to
return. You don't need to move the returns.

Perhaps the refactoring is worth doing anyway, if it improves the
readability of the code; but if it makes it worse then there's no need.
It's hard to tell about this just from looking at the diff --- what
do you feel about what you did?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-08-14 23:23:31 Re: improve FOUND in PL/PgSQL
Previous Message Neil Conway 2002-08-14 23:00:35 Re: improve FOUND in PL/PgSQL