On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 02:51:59PM -0800, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> So anyway, *I* would object to applying that; it was meant to
> illustrate what the comment, if any, should cover; not to be an
> actual code change.  I don't think the change that was pushed helps
> that comment carry its own weight, either.  If we can't do better
> than that, we should just drop it.
> 
> I guess I won't try to illustrate a point *that* particular way
> again....

OK, so does anyone object to removing this comment line?

	slot_attisnull()
	...
	    /*
	-->  * assume NULL if attnum is out of range according to the tupdesc
	     */
	    if (attnum > tupleDesc->natts)
	        return true;


-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers