| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvaro(dot)herrera(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Boris Kolpackov <boris(at)codesynthesis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add version macro to libpq-fe.h |
| Date: | 2021-06-18 18:24:10 |
| Message-ID: | 1233367.1624040650@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvaro(dot)herrera(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2021-Jun-18, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I guess one unresolved question is whether we want to mention these in
>> the SGML docs. I vote "no", because it'll raise the maintenance cost
>> noticeably. But I can see an argument on the other side.
> Well, if we do want docs for these macros, then IMO it'd be okay to have
> them in libpq-fe.h itself rather than SGML. A one-line comment for each
> would suffice:
WFM. I'd sort of supposed that the symbol names were self-documenting,
but you're right that a line or so of annotation improves things.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2021-06-18 18:27:16 | Re: Version reporting in pgbench |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-06-18 18:03:41 | Re: Add version macro to libpq-fe.h |