Re: Templates

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Templates
Date: 2000-07-11 21:09:44
Message-ID: 22170.963349784@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>>>> So the compiler information must disappear from the template files.
>>
>> Not exactly. We do need to be able to decide whether we are using
>> gcc or vendor cc in order to pick the right switches.

> I'll rephrase that: The name of the compiler needs to disappear from the
> template file. We'd still have a separate file for GCC vs vendor with the
> different CFLAGS, etc., but we wouldn't force CC= something.

Agreed.

>> One possible way of doing that is to merge the "cc" and "gcc"
>> templates and have if-tests in the templates instead. For example the
>> hpux template might look like

> Or that, but I'm not sure if that enhances readibility.

If you're doing the legwork I guess you get to choose ;-) ... but I like
the idea of combining the gcc and vendor-cc templates for a platform.
Usually there's a great deal of commonality, so having two templates
just means two files to edit (or forget to edit).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew McMillan 2000-07-11 21:10:51 Re: Re: postgres TODO
Previous Message Timothy H. Keitt 2000-07-11 20:46:15 system tables