Re: [HACKERS] psql Week 2

On Oct 11, Tom Lane mentioned:

> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > 2. What about including an snprintf() into the source tree similar what is
> > done with strdup()?
>
> There is one in the backend/port/ directory, along with some other
> important library routines that are missing on certain platforms.
> Up to now we haven't worried about including these into anything but
> the backend, but I see no reason not to include them into psql if
> you need 'em. (Probably would not be a good idea to put them into
> libpq though, since that could cause conflicts with user apps that
> supply their own versions.) See backend/port/Makefile.in for the
> tests that determine whether individual routines need to be included.

Okay, I'm sorry, I guess I never dug that far into the backend for that.
All those things seem kind of useful, so for good measure they could
perhaps be moved into the src/utils dir or a src/port dir.

I was not talking about putting them into libpq as public functions but if
someone working on libpq needed them there a way could surely be found.
Not me though right now.

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden