Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 12/15/09, Kurt Harriman <harri...@acm.org> wrote:
>> Attached is a revised patch, offered for the 2010-01 commitfest.
>> It's also available in my git repository in the "submitted" branch:
>>
>> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/harriman/share.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/submitted
> -1. The PG_INLINE is ugly.
FWIW, I think the patch is largely OK, except for the autoconf hackery
which I'm not the best-qualified person to opine on. I would only
suggest that the cleanest coding would be
#ifdef USE_INLINE
static inline foo(...) ...
#else
... non-inline definition of foo
#endif
ie, go ahead and rely on autoconf's definition (if any) of "inline"
and add a policy symbol USE_INLINE to determine whether to use it.
The proposed PG_INLINE coding conflates the symbol needed in the code
with the policy choice.
Another possibility would be to call the policy symbol HAVE_INLINE,
but that (a) risks collision with a name defined by autoconf built-in
macros, and (b) looks like it merely indicates whether the compiler
*has* inline, not that we have made a choice about how to use it.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
