From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | ldm(at)apartia(dot)ch |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: failed to compile a C++ SPI function |
Date: | 2000-10-08 03:14:27 |
Message-ID: | 200010080314.XAA24337@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I am willing to change it to typname. Any comments?
> Just for fun I changed the extension of my SPI function and trigger
> source file from .c to .C and tried to compile it:
>
> > g++ -g -Wall -I /usr/include/postgresql -fPIC -pedantic -c -o bid_control.o bid_control.C
> > In file included from /usr/include/postgresql/nodes/relation.h:18,
> > from /usr/include/postgresql/executor/spi.h:18,
> > from bid_control.h:31,
> > from bid_control.C:21:
> > /usr/include/postgresql/nodes/parsenodes.h:871: parse error before `typename'
>
> It seems the "typename" word used in the following structure is a
> reserved word in C++. (and is appears colored like a type in Vim)
>
> > /*
> > * ParamNo - specifies a parameter reference
> > */
> > typedef struct ParamNo
> > {
> > NodeTag type;
> > int number; /* the number of the parameter */
> > TypeName *typename; /* the typecast */
> ^^^^^^^^^
> > List *indirection; /* array references */
> > } ParamNo;
>
> Is it totally unreasonable try C++ in SPI programming?
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> --
> Louis-David Mitterrand - ldm(at)apartia(dot)org - http://www.apartia.org
>
> Isn't vi that text editor with two modes... one that beeps and one
> that corrupts your file?" -- Dan Jocabson, on comp.os.linux.advocacy
>
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-10-08 03:38:32 | Re: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Announce: Release of PyGreSQL version 3.0 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-10-08 02:56:04 | Re: Unruly rules |