Re: warning when compiling utils/tqual.h
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: warning when compiling utils/tqual.h |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140317164727.GG16438@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | warning when compiling utils/tqual.h (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: warning when compiling utils/tqual.h
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2014-03-17 13:40:53 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > I noticed (by running "cd src/include ; make check" with the attached > patch applied) that since commit b89e151054 ("Introduce logical > decoding.") tqual.h now emits this warning when compiled standalone: I think we should add such a check (refined to not rely on precompiled headers) to check-world or something... > 1. add "struct HTAB;" to the previous line in tqual.h, i.e. a forward > declaration. We have very few of these; most of the time ISTM we prefer > a solution like the next one: That's what I am for. We don't have *that* few of those. There's also several cases where struct pointers are members in other structs. There you don't even need a forward declaration (like e.g. struct HTAB* in PlannerInfo). > There is of course a third choice which is to dictate that this function > ought to be declared in reorderbuffer.h; but that would have the > unpleasant side-effect that tqual.c would need to #include that. I am pretty clearly against this. > Opinions please? I would like to have a guideline about this so I can > reason in a principled way in future cases in which this kind of > question arises. I'd welcome a clearly stated policy as well. I think forward declarations are sensible tool if used sparingly, to decouple things that are primarily related on the implementation level. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: