Re: Updated posix fadvise patch v19

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updated posix fadvise patch v19
Date: 2008-11-18 16:30:22
Message-ID: 87vdulgfoh.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:

> There are probably no rigid rules on this, but my interpretation of these tags
> is usually this:
>
> XXX -- not sure if this is the best way to do this, needs ideas
> TODO -- specific ideas for improvement
> FIXME -- broken, must be fixed to be usable

I don't have strong feelings on this. I appear to use them more or less
interchangeably.

Or perhaps what I did is consistent with your rules. Except that the "FIXME"
isn't unusable it's just that I put the prototype in clearly the wrong file.
So it definitely has to be corrected but I don't know where to move it.

The XXX is for something I think is correct now but might need to be fixed if
new callers need tighter memory management. And which could use a close look
by a reviewer to be sure I'm right about the memory management being ok for
now.

FWIW we don't seem to have any such strict rules about them:

$ find . -name \*.[ch] -print0 | xargs -0 grep FIXME | wc -l
22
$ find . -name \*.[ch] -print0 | xargs -0 grep XXX | wc -l
485
$ find . -name \*.[ch] -print0 | xargs -0 grep TODO | wc -l
33

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KaiGai Kohei 2008-11-18 16:42:38 Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)
Previous Message Paul Schlie 2008-11-18 16:27:13 Re: Block-level CRC checks