Matthias van de Meent <[email protected]> writes:
> I noticed the only changes here are for `static` definitions. Are we
> just more careful with normal functions, or does the compiler complain
> more easily about such "incomplete" definitions when they're in
> headers or need to be linked against?
Some years ago we had a buildfarm animal that would complain about
this construct, so the tree used to be clean. Probably it's just
chance that these have only snuck into local functions.
regards, tom lane
