Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
Date: 2005-10-17 17:32:47
Message-ID: 10026.1129570367@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> I can see a list of supported platforms [1], but not a list of
> supported compilers/linkers. If it's just a matter of reasearching the
> command-line options that can be done fairly easily, if anyone's
> interested...

(a) This problem is really not worth the trouble.

(b) I dislike portability approaches that try to enumerate supported
cases, rather than being general in the first place. Especially when
we can be pretty certain that this area is so unstandardized that *no*
toolchain you haven't specifically coded a case for will work.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-10-17 17:42:28 Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2005-10-17 17:32:22 Re: PostgreSQL roadmap for 8.2 and beyond.