| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: libpq's pollution of application namespace | 
| Date: | 2006-06-14 21:54:56 | 
| Message-ID: | 200606142154.k5ELsuq00583@candle.pha.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Thread added to TODO:
o Properly mark all libpq-exported functions with "PQ"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
> I find that libpq.so exports the following symbols that have neither
> PQ, pq, pg, nor lo_ as a prefix:
> 
> EncryptMD5
> SockAddr_cidr_mask
> fe_getauthname
> fe_getauthsvc
> fe_sendauth
> fe_setauthsvc
> freeaddrinfo_all
> getaddrinfo_all
> getnameinfo_all
> md5_hash
> rangeSockAddr
> 
> md5_hash seems a particularly unforgivable intrusion on application
> namespace :-(.  Any objection to fixing these things to be prefixed
> with pq or pg, which is the convention we usually follow for "internal"
> names that can't be static?
> 
> Also, these functions strictly speaking violate application namespace,
> but given that PQ appears infix, they're probably OK.
> 
> appendBinaryPQExpBuffer
> appendPQExpBuffer
> appendPQExpBufferChar
> appendPQExpBufferStr
> createPQExpBuffer
> destroyPQExpBuffer
> enlargePQExpBuffer
> initPQExpBuffer
> printfPQExpBuffer
> resetPQExpBuffer
> termPQExpBuffer
> 
> It'd be nicer if we could filter out all exported symbols that don't
> appear in exports.txt, but I don't know any portable way to do that.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
> 
-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-06-14 21:55:54 | Re: Multi-byte and client side character encoding | 
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-06-14 21:47:13 | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |