Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I thought about that but I figured the less we change the tz library,
> the easier it will be to replace later.
I have come to the conclusion that trying to minimize changes to the tz
library is a bad tradeoff. It's not going to be a minimally sized diff
for long. For instance, do you propose to exclude the tz code from all
future pgindent runs? If you look at the changes we made in the regex
library to make it minimally compliant with our own coding standards,
they were pretty extensive. The same is probably going to happen to the
tz code. For one thing, it is definitely not going to have K&R-style
function declarations for long --- those are trouble waiting to happen.
For another thing, it's not going to try to emulate the C library's API
for long, because getting out from under that brain-dead API is exactly
the reason for wanting to have our own timezone code. (I suspect the
only part of this code we really want in the long run is zic.c.)
In any case we should certainly not fix portability failures in the tz
code by breaking our other code, or even just risking breaking it.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-05-01 02:08:54|
|Subject: Re: pgsql-server/src/timezone pgtz.h|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-05-01 01:38:53|
|Subject: pgsql-server/src/timezone pgtz.c|