On 8 September 2011 10:22, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > If you believe the idea I suggested a few days ago that we ought to try > to push basic typedefs into a separate set of headers, then this could > be the first instance of that, which would lead to naming it something > like "datatype/timestamp.h". If that seems premature, then I guess it > ought to go into utils/, but then we need some other name because > utils/timestamp.h is taken.
The separate headers for basic typedefs makes perfect sense to me. Cheers, BJ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
