Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: > > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun dic 27 13:54:56 -0300 2010: > >> [ lightbulb ] ... although we could improve that quite a bit if we > >> processed each .h file separately instead of insisting on smashing > >> everything into one compilation. Let me go try that. > > > FWIW I have this patch lingering about that I wrote months ago, to check > > for header problems (not C++ stuff, just things like forgetting to > > include some necessary header in some other header). Since it needs a > > lot of polish (needs to ignore certain headers, and avoid leave > > lingering files around), I didn't commit it; and I haven't updated it to > > the new Make recursive stuff, either. > > src/tools/pginclude/ already contains several scripts for this sort of > thing. Bruce runs them by hand occasionally, although I just found out > that he's evidently not run the does-each-header-compile-standalone > test in awhile. It would probably pay to automate these.
It is true I have not run those tests in a while. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
