Re: [HACKERS] PATCH for pgconnection.h

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] PATCH for pgconnection.h
Дата
Msg-id 29252.931447823@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] PATCH for pgconnection.h  (Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com> writes:
> On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the proper solution is to add a configure-time test to see
>> whether a namespace declaration is needed.  We could use configure to
>> see whether we need ".h" on the end of C++ include file references, too.
>> (That's another thing that's going to be site-dependent for a while to
>> come.)

> Hmmm.  I'm running 2.7.2.1 here and in the case of <string> I have a
> file called: /usr/include/g++/string <-- note there's no .h on the end.
> Am I being dense here and missing something or does this differ from what
> other folks have?

Same as what I have, but I'm using gcc 2.7.2.2 so that's not real
surprising.  I was under the impression that naming conventions for
C++ library include files have changed at least once in the development
of the C++ standards --- but I may be mistaken.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Updated TODO list
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [Fwd: [HACKERS] Re: Postgresql 6.5-1 rpms on RedHat 6.0]