What I've done to solve the immediate C++ problem is to take the declaration of sys_nerr out of c.h entirely, and put it into the two C modules that actually need it. However, I'm still wondering whether we should not drop the rangecheck on errno completely. One interesting thing I discovered while wandering the web is that on at least some flavors of Windows, there are valid negative values of errno --- which our code will not convert to a useful string, as it stands... regards, tom lane
- [HACKERS] C++ interface build on FreeBSD 4.2 broken? Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface build on FreeBSD 4.2 bro... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface build on FreeBSD 4.2 bro... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface build on FreeBSD 4.2... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface build on FreeBSD... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface build on Fre... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface build o... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface bui... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface... Marko Kreen
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] C++ interface... Patrick Welche