Re: src/tools/pginclude considered harmful (was Re:

Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> > On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 04:24:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> After some reflection it seems that there is only one case where removal
> >> of a needed include file would not lead to a compiler error or warning,
> >> assuming gcc with ordinary -W settings (notably -Wmissing-prototypes).
> >> That case is exactly what Kris found: removal of a #define that is
> >> tested via #ifdef or #if defined(). (Can anyone think of other cases?)
>
> > My off-the-top-of-my-head solution would be a script that would pass
> > each file through "gcc -E" (the preprocessor), and compare before and
> > after rearrangement. You'd have to ignore the effects of included
> > header files, but it would pick up the cases where a block of code that
> > was previously included no longer is. Or if a macro is expanded
> > differently...
>
> You'd still have to try to compile the code though; AFAICS the above
> doesn't catch whether you've removed a typedef or function declaration
> that's referenced in the file.
>
> BTW, one of the remaining holes in pgrminclude is that it compiles with
> -fsyntax-only, which apparently causes it to fail to detect some errors
> of significance --- I assume that's how it managed to foul up lmgr.c,
> inet_net_ntop.c, etc.

But I do run a full compile and regression before commit, so that should
have caught it even if pgrminclude didn't.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +