Обсуждение: ecpg_config.h symbol missing with meson
I checked the generated ecpg_config.h with make and meson, and the meson
one is missing
#define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT 1
This is obviously quite uninteresting, since that is required by C99.
But it would be more satisfactory if we didn't have discrepancies like
that. Note that we also kept ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY in ecpg_config.h for
compatibility.
Fixing this on the meson side would be like
diff --git a/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/meson.build
b/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/meson.build
index 31610fef589..b85486acbea 100644
--- a/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/meson.build
+++ b/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/meson.build
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ ecpg_conf_keys = [
ecpg_conf_data = configuration_data()
ecpg_conf_data.set('ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY', 1)
+ecpg_conf_data.set('HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT', 1)
foreach key : ecpg_conf_keys
if cdata.has(key)
Alternatively, we could remove the symbol from the make side.
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
> I checked the generated ecpg_config.h with make and meson, and the meson
> one is missing
> #define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT 1
> This is obviously quite uninteresting, since that is required by C99.
> But it would be more satisfactory if we didn't have discrepancies like
> that. Note that we also kept ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY in ecpg_config.h for
> compatibility.
> ...
> Alternatively, we could remove the symbol from the make side.
Think I'd vote for removing it, since we use it nowhere.
The ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY precedent feels a little bit different,
since there's not the C99-requires-the-feature angle.
regards, tom lane
On 17.04.24 18:15, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: >> I checked the generated ecpg_config.h with make and meson, and the meson >> one is missing > >> #define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT 1 > >> This is obviously quite uninteresting, since that is required by C99. >> But it would be more satisfactory if we didn't have discrepancies like >> that. Note that we also kept ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY in ecpg_config.h for >> compatibility. >> ... >> Alternatively, we could remove the symbol from the make side. > > Think I'd vote for removing it, since we use it nowhere. > The ENABLE_THREAD_SAFETY precedent feels a little bit different, > since there's not the C99-requires-the-feature angle. Ok, fixed by removing instead.