On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 10:18 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't really agree that one is any more correct than the other. I
> also don't think we should be making changes like this as doing this
> may give some false impression that we have some standard to follow
> here that a local variable of a given type must be given a certain
> name. To comply with such a standard seems like it would take close to
> an endless number of patches which would just result in wasted
> reviewer and committer time and give us nothing but pain while back
> patching.
>
> -1 from me.
I agree with David. This seems like pointless code churn.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com