Hacker News Reader

It's completely besides the point, but part of the complexity of the char_count example is just due to the C version for some reason copying the input strings into newly allocated memory, which the zig version doesn't :)

View on HN

This is fair, and it's a bit embarrassing but I copied the C version from an older tutorial without looking at it critical enough. Still, the Zig version gets the arguments as normal function parameters and doesn't need to call `PG_GETARG_*`.

I notice that the c version looks like it uses memcopy as a convoluted typecast from a pointer to text (presumably a postgres typedef?) to a pointer to char (null terminated?)? Could this actually have a purpose?

Ed: I don't think PG uses c strings? Looks like memcopy might be needed for call-by-reference, return-by-value - but not really in the simple function that only walks the array?

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/xfunc-c.html#XFUNC-C...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com