Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 17977.1532362350@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Should contrib modules install .h files? (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Should contrib modules install .h files?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Also, let's recall that the point of this exercise is that you want to
> install the header files so that you can build things (another
> extension) that somehow interacts with those extensions. Then, even if
> you put things in separate directories per extension, you still need to
> make sure that all the installed header files don't clash, since you'll
> be adding the -I options of several of them. In a way, doing it this
> way will make things less robust, since it will appear to give extension
> authors license to use generic header names.
Personally, I'd recommend using *one* -I switch and having .c files
reference extension headers with #include "extensionname/headername.h".
As I said before, I think that we should change the existing contrib
modules to be coded likewise, all using a single -I switch that points
at SRCDIR/contrib. That'd help give people the right coding model
to follow.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: