> -----Original Message----- > From: Jürgen Cappel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 12:33 PM > To: Dann Corbit > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 beta version] > > > > Point 1 I completely agree on: byte order, alignment, > padding, etc. is different for each platform and data cannot > directly be exchanged. > > Point 2: who really needs C++ ?? C++ programmers do. I was responding to a suggestion that PostgreSQL was being compiled as C++. Perhaps I misunderstood.
> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- > Betreff: Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 beta version > Datum: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:55:45 -0700 > Von: "Dann Corbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: "Jeroen T. Vermeulen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bruce Momjian" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jeroen T. Vermeulen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 7:28 AM > > To: Bruce Momjian > > Cc: Dann Corbit; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 beta version > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 09:38:13PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > I don't think you can mix libs/binaries from different compilers. > > > > As long as it's plain old C, and the compilers adhere to the > > platform's ABI standards, why not? Even if you compile the C code > > using a C++ compiler, as in this case, any C structs will > be PODs and > > so should be compiled according to the C layout rules. > > 1. > The C language does not define alignment of structs. > > The C language does not specify that an integer shall be the > same size on two different platforms. > > The C language does not specify a portable way even to read > and write structs to disk and preserve alignment across platforms. > > The C language does not specify that IEEE arithmetic must be > used or even that a double shall be able to represent a value > larger than a float. > > 2. > It is a mistake to use a C++ compiler to compile C code, > because the languages are different. Stroustrup's statement > that good C code tends to be valid C++ code is not correct. > > Mingw GCC is both a C and a C++ compiler. Fortunately, the C > compiler is used, because there is no way that the code base > would compile as C code. A trivial example to show why not > is the frequent use of the C++ keyword 'new' in the code > base. Here is an example: regc_color.c (225): struct > colordesc *new; regc_color.c (251): new = (struct colordesc > *) MALLOC(n * regc_color.c (253): if (new != NULL) > regc_color.c (254): memcpy(VS(new), VS(cm->cdspace), > cm->ncds * regc_color.c (258): new = (struct colordesc *) > REALLOC(cm->cd, regc_color.c (260): if (new == NULL) > regc_color.c (265): cm->cd = new; > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
