> On Feb 11, 2020, at 12:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On 2020-Feb-11, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>> I thought about generating the files rather than merely checking them.
>> I could see arguments both ways. I wasn’t sure whether there would be
>> broad support for having yet another perl script generating source
>> files, nor for the maintenance burden of having to do that on all
>> platforms. Having a perl script that merely sanity checks the source
>> files has the advantage that there is no requirement for it to
>> function on all platforms. There’s not even a requirement for it to
>> be committed to the tree, since you could also argue that the
>> maintenance burden of the script outweighs the burden of getting the
>> source files right by hand.
>
> No thanks.
I’m not sure which option you are voting for:
(Option #1) Have the perl script generate the .c and .h file from a .dat file
(Option #2) Have the perl script validate but not generate the .c and .h files
(Option #3) Have no perl script, with all burden on the programmer to get the .c and .h files right by hand.
I think you’re voting against #3, and I’m guessing you’re voting for #1, but I’m not certain.
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company