Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Why? >> I'm not saying I'm against it, I'd just like to know why? Personally, I >> find the store-in-a-file a whole lot more handy. >> > > I am only talking about the names. I want the hash key names to be the > same as the configure argument names.
Oh, misunderstood you there. Then I have no objection :-) >>> Since this is a perl hash, we'll need to have some sort of mapping >>> convention. I suggest this: >>> >>> . where the configure arg doesn't take a value, make the hash value >>> undef (e.g. '--enable-integer-datetimes' => undef ) >>> >> >> Is there a way to differ that from just not being defined? otherwise, >> why not just make it 1 instead of undef? >> > > I guess we can just handle 1/0, and if we detect one of those act > appropriately - I don't think we have any cases where those would be > expected values of configure arguments. I think it would make things clearer. At least for those of us who don't breathe perl :-) //Magnus ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq