Re: C++-Language Function/Process List
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: C++-Language Function/Process List |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8288.1116863288@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: C++-Language Function/Process List (Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org> writes: > Kelly Burkhart <kelly@tradebotsystems.com> writes: >> I used C++ and noticed that some Postgres headers contain C++ keywords. >> Is there any interest among PG developers in making the C-language >> interface C++ clean? Or, is there hostility to this idea? > Postgres is written in C. AIUI it's somewhat dangerous to link C++ > functions into the backend, since PG doesn't know how to cope with > thrown exceptions and the like. However, as long as you avoid constructs like throw that require C++ library support, you can in principle use C++ as "a better C". (Now that we have PG_TRY it might even be interesting to see if that could be integrated with C++ throw ...) Avoiding C++ keywords has been discussed before, and my recollection is that we decided the changes would be more invasive than the value would justify. But that was a long time ago and the situation may have changed. I'd suggest spending enough time to work up a rough list of what would need to be changed, and putting it up for discussion in the -hackers list. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: