| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Esteban Zimanyi <estebanzimanyi(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Help with User-defined function in PostgreSQL with Visual C++ |
| Date: | 2010-09-28 03:12:05 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTin-t=QKaFokoig7ufb_2JGRGB2XNzh7BkNBnry4@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Itagaki Takahiro
<itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Since we have PGDLLEXPORT in 9.0, we can mark some of exported
>>> functions with it in tutorial codes and maybe contrib modules.
>>
>> If that (a) works and (b) reduces user confusion, +1 from me. We've
>> gotten this question a few times lately.
>
> If we do so, many PGDLLEXPORT will be added:
> * 17 in src/tutorial
> * 507 in contrib
> for each exported PGFunction, _PG_init, and _PG_fini.
>
> Any objections? Am I missing something?
Oh - I didn't realize this meant marking lots of things in contrib
that didn't otherwise need to be marked. Why do other people need
this if we don't?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-28 03:17:52 | Re: proposal: tsearch dictionary initialization hook |
| Previous Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2010-09-28 03:09:05 | Re: Help with User-defined function in PostgreSQL with Visual C++ |