NEXTSTEP porting problems

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: NEXTSTEP porting problems
Date: 1999-02-10 02:02:44
Message-ID: 199902100202.LAA24274@srapc451.sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

A NEXTSTEP3.3 user reported some porting problems.

1. #if FALSE problem

For example in src/include/utils/int8.h:

#if FALSE
extern int64 *int28 (int16 val);
extern int16 int82(int64 * val);

#endif

Unfortunately in NEXTSTEP FALSE has been already defined as:

#define FALSE ((boolean_t) 0)

What about using #if 0 or #if PG_FALSE or whatever instead of #if
FALSE?

2. Datum problem

NEXTSTEP has its own "Datum" type and of course it coflicts with
PostgreSQL's Datum. Possible solution might be put below into c.h:

#ifdef NeXT
#undef Datum
#define Datum PG_Datum
#define DatumPtr PG_DatumPtr
#endif

Comments?
--
Tatsuo Ishii

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas G. Lockhart 1999-02-10 02:28:10 Re: [HACKERS] Keywords
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 1999-02-09 23:16:16 Re: [HACKERS] Keywords