Re: split builtins.h to quote.h
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: split builtins.h to quote.h |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 548C6081.2000004@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: split builtins.h to quote.h (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: split builtins.h to quote.h
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/08/2014 12:37 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 5:55 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Michael Paquier wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:31 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>>> I thought the consensus was that the SQL-callable function declarations >>>> should remain in builtins.h -- mainly so that quote.h does not need to >>>> include fmgr.h. >>> Moving everything to quote.h is done in-line with what Tom and Robert >>> suggested, builtins.h being a refuge for function declarations that >>> have nowhere else to go. Suggestion from here: >>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmoZF3dkpTuA6Ex6gXLnnd-nMS-fBjCXRoiTwFfH-+6yBQQ@mail.gmail.com >> Did you miss this one? >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/31728.1413209460@sss.pgh.pa.us > Well, yes :) I missed that. Note that I am leaning to Robert's > direction as well to do a clear separation... Now if the final > consensus is different, then let's use the patch attached that puts > the SQL functions to builtins.h, and the rest in quote.h. > I am unlcear about what the consensus is on this, and don't have strong feelings either way. Do we need a vote? It's not of earth-shattering importance, but my slight inclination would be to do the minimally invasive thing where there is disagreement. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: