Re: tiny fix needed

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: tiny fix needed
Date: 2006-11-27 18:05:57
Message-ID: 21223.1164650757@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Hmm. Well, it turns out that pg_vfprintf is declared static in our
> snprintf.c. The only place vfprintf is used in the backend is in elog.c,
> although it is used in a variety of frontend programs, so it looks like
> this needs to be fixed properly.

> Is there any reason we shouldn't treat vfprintf the same as other
> members of the printf family?

It certainly seems odd that we don't. I suppose that at some point
someone thought that vfprintf wasn't used anywhere --- but obviously
it is now, so I'd vote for changing it. Given that we do have working
(because used by other entry points) pg_vfprintf, I'd argue that this
is a trivial fix and OK to do after RC1.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2006-11-27 18:11:20 Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-11-27 18:02:50 Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues