From: | Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: old testlo example code |
Date: | 2013-01-06 09:12:34 |
Message-ID: | CAAfz9KM1xJtwdpfKTrhQy=AXAo3i4ggYuumTrZ9BFRzJCktnkw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
2013/1/5 Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > This documentation page:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/lo-examplesect.html
> >
> > contains a hardcoded copy of ./src/test/examples/testlo.c, and it
> > seems like this version hasn't been updated along with its source. The
> > version from the docs no longer compiles for me, at least not when I
> > drop it into the place of the current ./src/test/examples/testlo.c.
> > That's easy enough to fix, though I have a historical question about
> > this code.
>
> ISTM we should either remove the example programs and replace them
> with just a reference, or find a way to include the source code into
> the documentation with some kind of include statement instead of
> haivng a copy of it. That should be done the same way for all the
> example programs, not just the testlo ones of course.
>
> Not sure if it's possible to create such an include though - someone
> who knows our toolchain better can hopefully comment on that?
>
I think it's possible with Doxygen.
>
> --
> Magnus Hagander
> Me: http://www.hagander.net/
> Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
>
--
// Dmitriy.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2013-01-06 10:33:05 | Re: old testlo example code |
Previous Message | Josh Kupershmidt | 2013-01-05 18:26:38 | Re: streaming replication confusion |