Re: Unnecessary #include in objectaddress.h?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unnecessary #include in objectaddress.h?
Date: 2015-07-20 22:10:48
Message-ID: 20150720221048.GV2301@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Adam Brightwell wrote:
> All,
>
> While looking at the include dependency graph for objectaddress.h:
>
> http://doxygen.postgresql.org/objectaddress_8h.html
>
> I saw that pg_list.h is both included and inherited (through multiple
> paths) by objectaddress.h. Perhaps this doesn't matter, but I thought
> I would at least bring it up and propose removing this redundant
> #include from objectaddress.h.

I wondered whether to bother about this kind of thing for a while. It
doesn't have any practical impact immediately, because obviously
pg_list.h is still included indirectly by objectaddress.h (via lock.h in
this case IIRC). If we made some restructuring that caused the other
header not to include pg_list.h anymore, that would make objectaddress.h
broken -- unless objectaddress.h itself no longer needed pg_list.h.

We've had in previous rounds whole iterations on a "pgrminclude" script
that does this kind of thing, but the breakage after each such run is
large.

All in all, I wouldn't bother unless there is an actual change.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adam Brightwell 2015-07-20 23:01:14 Re: security labels on databases are bad for dump & restore
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-07-20 21:17:34 Re: "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.