> Isn't pgtypeslib/*.h exposed to ecpg-using applications?
No, the public interface is is include/*.h, pgtypeslib/*.h is only
internal.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael at xmpp dot
Michael Meskes writes:
>> Maybe it'd be good idea to unify some of that stuff so that ecpg can
>> use it, too? Having a second copy of the same stuff in
>> src/interfaces/ecpg/pgtypeslib/dt.h is pretty terrible. Even if not,
>> let's make sure they don't diverge.
> Please let's unify whatever w
> Maybe it'd be good idea to unify some of that stuff so that ecpg can
> use
> it, too? Having a second copy of the same stuff in
> src/interfaces/ecpg/pgtypeslib/dt.h is pretty terrible. Even if not,
> let's make sure they don't diverge.
Please let's unify whatever we can. The fewer manual sync
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 10/03/2017 04:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I like the new-header-file idea because it will result in minimal code
> > churn and thus minimal back-patching hazards.
> >
> > I do *not* like "PG_PM". For our own purposes that adds no uniqueness
> > at all. If we're to touc
On 10/03/2017 04:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> On 2017-10-03 16:34:38 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> AFAICT at a quick glance these are only used in a couple of files. Maybe
>>> the defs need to be floated off to a different header with more limited
>>> inclusion?
>> Why no
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2017-10-03 16:34:38 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> AFAICT at a quick glance these are only used in a couple of files. Maybe
>> the defs need to be floated off to a different header with more limited
>> inclusion?
> Why not just rename them to PG_PM etc? If we force pot
Hi,
On 2017-10-03 16:34:38 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 10/03/2017 03:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In my llvm jit work I'd to
> >
> > #undef PM
> > /* include some llvm headers */
> > #define PM 1
> >
> > because llvm has a number of functions which have an argument named PM.
>
On 10/03/2017 03:00 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In my llvm jit work I'd to
>
> #undef PM
> /* include some llvm headers */
> #define PM 1
>
> because llvm has a number of functions which have an argument named PM.
> Now that works, but it's fairly ugly. Perhaps it would be a good idea to
Hi,
In my llvm jit work I'd to
#undef PM
/* include some llvm headers */
#define PM 1
because llvm has a number of functions which have an argument named PM.
Now that works, but it's fairly ugly. Perhaps it would be a good idea to
name these defines in a manner that's slightly less likely to con