Re: uintptr_t for Datum

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Date: 2010-01-01 18:58:20
Message-ID: 1262372300.29407.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On tor, 2009-12-31 at 13:44 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> BTW, it looks like the patch is showing a manual change to
> > >> pg_config.h.in. Don't do that. Run autoheader.
> >
> > > I wasn't aware autoheader existed. Is that new or has it alwasy been
> > > part of autoconf?
> >
> > It's always been there, or at least for many years. pg_config.h.in
> > really ought to be thought of the same as configure: you don't edit
> > it, you just generate it.
>
> Well, that's pretty confusing considering it has a .in suffix, just like
> configure.in, which we do edit, but I get your point.

I realize it's easy to miss, but the first line of pg_config.h.in tells
that it is generated.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2010-01-01 19:01:07 Re: Win64 warnings about size_t
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2010-01-01 18:44:18 Re: Thoughts on statistics for continuously advancing columns