[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> >>> Please see my posting about using a macro for snprintf.
> >>
> >> > Wasn't the issue about odd behavior of the Win32 linker choosing the
> >> wrong
> >> > vnsprintf?
> >>
> >> You're right, the point about the macro was to avoid linker weirdness on
> >> Windows. We need to do that part in any case. I think Bruce confused
> >> that issue with the one about whether our version supported %n$
> >> adequately ... which it doesn't just yet ...
> >
> > Perhaps I am reading old email in this reply but I thought I should
> > clarify:
> >
> > Once we do:
> >
> > #define vsnprintf(...) pg_vsnprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
> > #define snprintf(...) pg_snprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
> > #define printf(...) pg_printf(__VA_ARGS__)
>
>
> I'm not sure that macros can have variable number of arguments on all
> supported platforms. I've been burnt by this before.
The actual patch is:
+ #ifdef __GNUC__
+ #define vsnprintf(...) pg_vsnprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
+ #define snprintf(...) pg_snprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
+ #define printf(...) pg_printf(__VA_ARGS__)
+ #else
+ #define vsnprintf pg_vsnprintf
+ #define snprintf pg_snprintf
+ #define printf pg_printf
+ #endif
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (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
