From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Subject: | Renaming more clearly SHA functions in pgcrypto/ |
Date: | 2016-07-04 07:15:55 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRdY4WyuP2U7pmpjwgLUruePmSoV_Dvz-Wv67GpMMjXNg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
(folks interested in that in CC)
While looking at some facility in pgcrypto, I have noticed the stanza
created by 56f4478 to prevent conflicts with OpenSSL, like that:
+#define SHA256_Init pg_SHA256_Init
+#define SHA256_Update pg_SHA256_Update
Wouldn't it be better to avoid that, and just rename all those
functions as pg_shaXX_foo? It seems to me that this would be more
in-line with what's already in core. This renaming would be part of
the refactoring effort for SCRAM to have all the functions for SHA1,
SHA156, etc in a unique file sha.c in src/common with a reworked
interface, particularly for SHA1 where things are quite inconsistent
with SHA2XX.
Opinions? As that's a matter really rather independent on SCRAM, I
prefer creating a new thread to gather opinions..
Thanks,
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-07-04 07:29:21 | Re: [CF2016-9] Allow spaces in working path on tap-tests |
Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-07-04 07:02:13 | [CF2016-9] Allow spaces in working path on tap-tests |