Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> If you want erand48_r, best to provide that API, not kluge up some
>> other functions.
> ...because erand48() is a GNU extension with a stupid API.
I assume you mean erand48_r, there, because erand48 is pretty standard.
> I don't
> see much value in supporting that, on both counts. We're going to end
> up with the built-in erand48_r() on precisely those systems that use
> glibc, and our own everywhere else. For the 25 SLOCs it's going cost
> us, I'd rather use the same code everywhere.
Maybe. But if that's the approach we want to use, let's just call it
pg_erand48 in the code, and dispense with the alias macros as well as
all vestiges of configure support.
BTW, as far as the original plan of using random_r is concerned, how
did you manage to not run into this?
I just wasted half an hour on that stupidity in an unrelated context...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-08-03 02:27:53|
|Subject: Re: pgbench internal contention|
|Previous:||From: Peter Geoghegan||Date: 2011-08-02 23:52:17|
|Subject: Further news on Clang - spurious warnings|