| From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Bryan Henderson <bryanh(at)giraffe-data(dot)com>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: bool: symbol name collision |
| Date: | 2010-05-11 19:09:43 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTilDSH6gNR2nt3_XeChvZhZYPX5Zg1rfqhaokVVH@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:42, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I guess the question that comes to mind for me is how many other
> things fall into this category. We define a lot of symbols like int4
> and int32 that other people could also have defined, and I don't
> really want to s/^/pg/ all of them. If it's really only a question of
> renaming bool I could see doing it.
You mean i'd get the pleasure of 'fixing' all my 3rd party C modules?
Not that that is a huge problem, we have broken calling conventions in
most releases...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-11 19:47:06 | Re: bool: symbol name collision |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-05-11 18:42:31 | Re: bool: symbol name collision |