2010/1/2 Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net>: > On tor, 2009-12-31 at 11:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: >> > The definition of c.h is bogus anyway. You might think it contains >> > includes and defines to set up a portable C environment, which is what >> > the first half indeed does. >> >> > But then things like regproc, transaction ID types, IntArray, varlena, >> > bytea, oidvector, NameData, etc. do not belong there and should be moved >> > to postgres.h. >> >> Actually, what c.h does is to provide definitions that are needed in >> both frontend and backend code. And we do NOT want to start including >> postgres.h in frontend code. It might be that some of the declarations >> there are useless to frontend code and could be moved, but trying to be >> as strict as you suggest is only going to create problems. > > I think the list above is a pretty good list of things that client code > doesn't need, plus or minus a few things maybe. > Looking closer in c.h, there are several things to move or remove (and it gets slightly more efficient if we do), but it seems we don't have such motivation...
Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
