On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 6:16 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 06:18:32PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 4:58 PM Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> One question: Regarding date2timestamp_no_overflow(), should we rename
> >> it to date2double? We can't use date2timestamp_safe because we already
> >> have that function. The renaming is relevant because this function
> >> converts a date to the double data type, which allows us to remove the
> >> "_no_overflow" extension.
> >
> > Makes sense to me.
>
> Yes, it would be nice to change all this area at once to remain
> consistent across the board. date2timestamp_no_overflow() is the last
> "no_overflow" routine in date.h.
I have attached patch 0002 that renames it. I also updated patch 0001
to accommodate Amit's comment suggestions.
Regards,
Amul