Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: libpqxx update

From: jtv <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: libpqxx update
Date: 2001-12-02 04:41:22
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 07:08:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sure, we could talk about that.  7.2 is feature-frozen of course, but
> for some future release ...

Great.  My main concern is with compiler portability.  I don't have access
to a lot of compilers or platforms right now, and I'm sure my code will 
break on various compilers depending on how much of the C++ standard they

One of my design parameters was to just require the support I needed and 
not bother too much with backward compilers.  I can see that could be a 
problem when integrating into the source tree; I don't expect to be able
to kludge around all compiler shortfalls.  Assuming this code is 
integrated, is not having libpqxx available on all platforms that
PostgreSQL runs on acceptable?  Or does it become acceptable when there
is good reason to suppose that the remaining platforms can be supported
later on as their compilers improve?

In response to


pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2001-12-02 14:01:37
Subject: Re: Can a windows DLL have more than one process attached?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-12-02 00:08:54
Subject: Re: libpqxx update

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group