From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Custom variables and flags, again |
Date: | 2008-11-17 01:54:23 |
Message-ID: | 15777.1226886863@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> What happens
>> when we add some field or other to those structs?
> There are problems when we modify the middle fields in those
> structs, but it means modification of existing arguments in
> DefineCustomXXXVariable(); The same problems occur in both
> implementations.
No, they are not the same problems. You can rely on the C compiler
to complain if you aren't passing enough arguments to a function.
You can't rely on it to complain if your struct constant is putting
values into the wrong fields.
Perhaps more to the point, guc_tables.h is a file that we don't even
want the majority of the backend including. Why would we think it's
a good idea to make that part of the public API to external modules?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2008-11-17 02:03:42 | Re: Custom variables and flags, again |
Previous Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2008-11-17 01:12:10 | Re: Custom variables and flags, again |