Re: Autoconf, libpq and replacement function
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Autoconf, libpq and replacement function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4925D48B.3000806@hagander.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Autoconf, libpq and replacement function (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Autoconf, libpq and replacement function
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> Not really. I'd suggest making the callers do something like >>> >>> #ifdef HAVE_FNMATCH >>> #include <fnmatch.h> >>> #else >>> #include "port/pg_fnmatch.h" >>> #endif > >> How's that actually different from the >> #ifdef HAVE_FNMATCH >> #include <fnmatch.h> <-- happens in fe-secure.c >> #else >> #define .... <-- happens in port.h >> #endif > > What's bothering me is that port.h gets included *everywhere*, and > might perhaps conflict with some indirect or accidental inclusion > of <fnmatch.h>. > > It would also allow someone to forget the > #ifdef HAVE_FNMATCH > #include <fnmatch.h> > #endif > part and have it still work, if they were testing on a broken platform. > It's better that both inclusions appear together instead of having the > alternative code paths effectively appear in two unrelated files. Ok, I see your argument now. AFAICS, we're not doing this for any other functions though - or am I too tired and just looking in the wrong place? Or is that because they're just function definitions and not #defines? (I want to be sure to stick whatever new file there is in the same place..) //Magnus
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: