On 13 Oct. 2016 05:28, "Tom Lane" <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > I wrote: > > Albe Laurenz <laurenz.a...@wien.gv.at> writes: > >> Tom Lane wrote: > >>> I'm okay with adding PGDLLEXPORT to the extern, but we should update > >>> that comment to note that it's not necessary with any of our standard > >>> Windows build processes. (For that matter, the comment fails to explain > >>> why this macro is providing an extern for the base function at all...) > > >> Here is a patch for that, including an attempt to improve the comment. > > > Pushed with some further twiddling of the comment. > > Well, the buildfarm doesn't like that even a little bit. It seems that > the MSVC compiler does not like seeing both "extern Datum foo(...)" and > "extern PGDLLEXPORT Datum foo(...)", so anything that had an extern in > a .h file is failing. There is also quite a bit of phase-of-the-moon > behavior in here, because in some cases some functions are raising errors > and others that look entirely the same are not.
Pretty sure we discussed and did exactly this before around 9.4. Will check archives... Yeah. Here's the thread. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/27019.1397571477%40sss.pgh.pa.us#27019.1397571...@sss.pgh.pa.us I think the discussion last time came down to you and I disagreeing about Microsoft droppings too ;)