Jan Wieck wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > BTW, I would not approve of a response along the lines of "can't you
> > #ifdef to the point that there are no code changes in the Unix builds?"
> > No you can't, unless you want to end up with an unmaintainable mess 
> > of #ifdef spaghetti.  The thing that makes this hard is the tradeoff
> > between making the code readable and maintainable (which requires
> > sharing as much code as possible across platforms) vs isolating
> > platform-specific considerations.  Programming at this level is not
> > a science but an art form, and it's very hard to get it right the first
> > time --- especially when none of us have access to all the platforms
> > that the code must ultimately work on.
> Exactly my point and the reason I am doing the entire fork+exec stuff 
> over again. Bruce nagged me endlessly to commit the broken parts I had 
> and fix them later. I never agreed with that philosophy because in my 
> experience the worst workarounds live forever.

I wouldn't say nagging ... I would say NAGGING.  :-)

  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
      joining column's datatypes do not match

Reply via email to