On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> My compiler, C++ and more recent C standards are OK with identical >> redefinition of a typedef like that, but not the older standards or >> those particular compilers. D'oh. (I should figure out how to make >> my automatic patch tester this fussy). I think we should probably >> just do this: > > Our usual locution for this sort of thing is to use > "struct SharedRecordTypmodRegistry" in headers instead of > the typedef name, if we don't want to pull in the header > where the typedef is defined. It might be all right to do > what you suggest, but we've been burnt in the past by circular > dependencies and/or pulling some header into essentially > the entire build (which tends to lead to a mess down the road). > I'd generally lean in the direction of not adding #includes to > header files except where absolutely necessary.
Here's a version that just forward declares SharedRecordTypmodRegistry in session.h (but keeps the typedef in typcache.h where it is useful for shorter function prototypes). Neither GCC 6 -Wall -std=c89 not Clang -Wall -std=c89 complained about this problem. I found an old GCC 4.3 compiler and it complained about the typedef redefinition and also the use of an anonymous union, also fixed in the attached. Sorry about that -- clearly I need to test my patches on more compilers in future. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
0001-Don-t-redefine-typedefs-or-use-anonymous-unions.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
