Re: Scanner/Parser question - what does _P imply? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From
Subject Re: Scanner/Parser question - what does _P imply?
Date
Msg-id 1169117834.2805.72.camel@sakai.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Scanner/Parser question - what does _P imply?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
<blockquote type="CITE"><pre>
<font color="#000000">P = Parser.  The reason for the _P is just to avoid conflicts with</font>
<font color="#000000">other definitions of the macro name, either in our own code or various</font>
<font color="#000000">platforms' header files.  We haven't been totally consistent about it,</font>
<font color="#000000">but roughly speaking we've stuck _P on when it was either known or</font>
<font color="#000000">seemed likely that there might be a conflict.</font>

<font color="#000000">Some years ago there was discussion of consistently P-ifying *all* those</font>
<font color="#000000">macros, but it didn't get done; I think Thomas or somebody objected that</font>
<font color="#000000">it would make gram.y needlessly harder to read.</font>
</pre></blockquote><br /> Ahhh... now it's clear. <br /><br /> Thanks.<br /><br /><br />             -- Korry

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: Temparary disable constraint
Next
From: Teodor Sigaev
Date:
Subject: Re: Design notes for EquivalenceClasses