Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Small changes to facilitate Win32 port

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
Cc: Katherine Ward <kward6(at)yahoo(dot)com>,Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Small changes to facilitate Win32 port
Date: 2002-05-31 17:22:32
Message-ID: 19116.1022865752@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> writes:
> Question to all: Any objection to postfix? If so, why?

Well, I suggested DTF_FOO by analogy to the DTK_FOO name set that appears
elsewhere in that same header.  If you want to rename those to FOO_DTK
in parallel, I have no objection.

> IGNORE_TOK - How about "IGNORE_DTF" or "IGNORE_D"? Let's make it a bit
> specific to date/time stuff.

Agreed.  That thought was what motivated me to gripe in the first place.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ron SnyderDate: 2002-05-31 21:44:54
Subject: Can't import large objects in most recent cvs (20020531 -- approx 1pm PDT)
Previous:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2002-05-31 17:21:05
Subject: Re: Small changes to facilitate Win32 port

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group