Re: MSVC

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Now that we seem to have MSVC building working tolerably well, I think
> we need a bit of cleanup. In particular, I think the config setup needs
> to be more like the arguments we pass to the standard configure script.

Why?
I'm not saying I'm against it, I'd just like to know why? Personally, I
find the store-in-a-file a whole lot more handy.

> This shouldn't be hard, but I think it should be done before we go to
> beta, if possible. I think the names should match up pretty much one for
> one - this should make faking out pg_config easier.

If we're changing it then yes, it's definitely better to do it before beta.

> Since this is a perl hash, we'll need to have some sort of mapping
> convention. I suggest this:
>
> . where the configure arg doesn't take a value, make the hash value
> undef (e.g. '--enable-integer-datetimes' => undef )

Is there a way to differ that from just not being defined? otherwise,
why not just make it 1 instead of undef?

> . where the configure arg would occur with a single value, just set
> that (e.g. '--prefix' => 'c:\\foo' )
> . where the configure arg would occur with a multiple value, provide a
> listref (e.g. '--with-libs' => [ 'c:\\bar', 'd:\\baz' ] )

These I get. ;-)

//Magnus