| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mike Palmiotto <mike(dot)palmiotto(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql |
| Date: | 2017-04-05 15:31:43 |
| Message-ID: | 6d700f91-6bcb-9092-c897-501c7228975f@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04/04/2017 09:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I doubt that works at all, TBH. What I'd expect to happen with a
> typical compiler is a complaint about redefinition of typedef bool,
> because c.h already declared it and here this fragment is doing
> so again. It'd make sense to me to do
>
> + #ifdef bool
> + #undef bool
> + #endif
>
> to get rid of the macro definition of bool that stdbool.h is
> supposed to provide. But there should be no reason to declare
> our typedef a second time.
makes sense
> Another issue is whether you won't get compiler complaints about
> redefinition of the "true" and "false" macros. But those would
> likely only be warnings, not flat-out errors.
I have not been able to generate warnings or errors around "true" and
"false".
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-04-05 15:33:51 | Re: Logical Replication and Character encoding |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-04-05 15:25:50 | Re: Logical decoding on standby |