Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21378.1183010872@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler
Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler Re: SPI-header-files safe for C++-compiler |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > On Thu, 2007-28-06 at 01:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> The patch as given merely renames some random identifiers that happen to >> be keywords in some non-C language ... > The fact is, any user-written extensions that depend on types defined in > parsenodes.h and primnodes.h are going to get broken all the time > *anyway*, so I don't see this as a major disadvantage. Sure, but we don't break them just on a whim. The bottom line here is whether we are going to make a real commitment to making C++ usable as a backend extension language --- and for the reasons I mentioned, that would entail a lot more than renaming a few identifiers. It was already pointed out upthread that wrapping the inclusions in extern "C" {...} would fix the identifier part of the problem from the user side, so I do not see the point of fixing it from our side unless we are prepared to buy into a lot of other changes. A C++ writer who is unwilling to add the extern{} bit around inclusions of C headers seems unlikely to "work with us" as regards to error-throwing conventions, for instance. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: