Hi, On 2014-01-15 00:41:41 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: > > This idea has appeared at least twice now, in > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1386301050.2743.17.ca...@vanquo.pezone.net > > and http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/52d25aa2.50...@2ndquadrant.com . > > Even if it doesn't help with Windows issues, as discussed in the second > > thread, it still seems like a win for reducing boilerplate and accidental > > compiler warnings. So here is a patch for consideration. > > Meh. I don't think that extension authors are really going to appreciate > changing from "thou shalt declare all thy functions" to "thou shalt > declare none of them". If the code were such that it wouldn't matter > whether a manual declaration were provided too, then that wouldn't be a > big deal --- but you seem to be ignoring the discussion in the one thread > cited above about PGDLLEXPORT. > > Also, surely it is 100% bogus for fmgr.h to be declaring functions not > actually provided by fmgr.c. That will create about as many failure > modes as it removes, not to mention being conceptually wrong. > > The latter point might possibly be worked around by putting the externs > for _PG_init and _PG_fini into the PG_MODULE_MAGIC macro, though I'm not > sure how well that works for multi-source-file extensions; the init > functions might be in some other file than the PG_MODULE_MAGIC call.
Based on those comments and the lack of counter arguments after a month I am going to mark the patch as rejected. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
