* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > ... BTW, another reason to choose identical APIs for frontend and backend > versions of these functions is that it greatly eases use of them in shared > frontend/backend code. As I notice somebody has *already done* in > common/relpath.c. I'm not exactly sure how those psprintf calls are > working at all in frontend builds. Maybe they aren't quite, and that has > something to do with the failures on anole?
Seems plausible.
> In order to avoid having to clutter stuff like that with #ifdef FRONTENDs,
> I'm now thinking we should use exactly the same names for the frontend and
> backend versions, ie psprintf() and pvsprintf(). The main reason for
> considering a pg_ prefix for the frontend versions was to avoid cluttering
> application namespace; but it's already the case that we don't expect
> libpgcommon to be namespace clean.
To be honest, I had been assuming we'd use the same names. As for which
direction to go, I'd personally prefer psprintf but that's just my lazy
developer fingers talking.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
