On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:43:46PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-10-11 17:19:27 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 10:44:39AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Started a new thread to raise awareness.
> >
> > > Ref: this comes from
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqR1iVd5r_QN_ngmkBOLQmAGBOsJ4WNPo8eybNn6WE_Kdw@mail.gmail.com
> >
> > Thanks. You can assume I'm -1 on every header split proposal not driving a
> > substantial compile duration improvement:
>
> I don't know. Isn't it, from a aesthetic POV, wrong to have all that
> stuff in builtins.h? The stuff split of really doesn't seem to belong
> there?
Yes, the status quo is aesthetically wrong. Still, any clarity improvement
from this split is vaporous. The cost of breaking module builds is real.
> I personally wouldn't object plaing a #include for the splitof file into
> builtin.h to address backward compat concerns. Would imo still be an
> improvement.
Agreed. If the patch preserved compatibility by having builtins.h include
quote.h, I would not object.
nm