Re: cpluspluscheck vs ICU again

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Subject: Re: cpluspluscheck vs ICU again
Date: 2025-08-06 14:01:03
Message-ID: 1394565.1754488863@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 12:26 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> BTW, I see that you applied ed26c4e25 only to master, but don't
>> we want to back-patch? cpluspluscheck is not just an exercise in a
>> vacuum, it's to ensure that C++-coded extensions don't have trouble
>> with our headers.

> I was thinking that it was run only when developing new features, not
> for backpatch-able bug fixes, but that's a flawed assumption. I'll
> remedy that soon along with the new symbols above, unless you beat me
> to it.

Sounds good, thanks for dealing with it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2025-08-06 14:12:53 Re: index prefetching
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2025-08-06 13:53:41 Re: Fixed a minor typo in code comment