Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Tom Lane
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 13:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Is it worth renaming our qsort to pg_qsort to avoid this? (I'd be >> inclined to do that via a macro "#define qsort pg_qsort", not by running >> around and changing all the code.) > Why not change each

Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Neil Conway
On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 13:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Is it worth renaming our qsort to pg_qsort to avoid this? (I'd be > inclined to do that via a macro "#define qsort pg_qsort", not by running > around and changing all the code.) Why not change each call site? I don't think it would hurt to be c

Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Magnus Hagander
> >> Is it worth renaming our qsort to pg_qsort to avoid this? > >> (I'd be inclined to do that via a macro "#define qsort > pg_qsort", not > >> by running around and changing all the code.) > > > Yeah, I think it is ;-) Just make sure it happens before we pull in > > stdlib.h, so we don't re

Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Tom Lane
"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Is it worth renaming our qsort to pg_qsort to avoid this? >> (I'd be inclined to do that via a macro "#define qsort >> pg_qsort", not by running around and changing all the code.) > Yeah, I think it is ;-) Just make sure it happens before we pull

Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 01:56:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Is it worth renaming our qsort to pg_qsort to avoid this? (I'd be > inclined to do that via a macro "#define qsort pg_qsort", not by running > around and changing all the code.) Redefining a function that is defined in POSIX and present

Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Magnus Hagander
> > MSVCRTD.lib(MSVCR80D.dll) : error LNK2005: _qsort already > defined in > > qsort.obj > > Hmm. I've been seeing related complaints on Darwin, but they > were just warnings (about our qsort conflicting with the one in libc). Yeah, seems it works in Mingw, but for some reason it's fatal in M

Re: [HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Tom Lane
"Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just tried a rebuild of the MSVC stuff, and got the following error. > Any ideas on the best way to fix that? > 1>.\src\port\qsort.c(53) : warning C4005: 'min' : macro redefinition > C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio This is fixed a

[HACKERS] qsort vs MSVC build

2006-10-19 Thread Magnus Hagander
I just tried a rebuild of the MSVC stuff, and got the following error. Any ideas on the best way to fix that? (as you notice, I haven't pulled the very latest cvs so I haven't for the min() fix that's put in now. Just let me know if the rest is also fixed ;-)) //Magnus Build started: Project: p