Re: typedef struct LogicalDecodingContext - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: typedef struct LogicalDecodingContext
Date
Msg-id 1769065.1677711890@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to typedef struct LogicalDecodingContext  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: typedef struct LogicalDecodingContext  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> writes:
> AFAICT just by pre-declaring the typedef struct
> LogicalDecodingContext, all of those 'struct LogicalDecodingContext'
> can be culled, resulting in cleaner and more consistent function
> signatures.

Sadly, this is almost certainly going to cause bitching on the part of
some compilers, because depending on the order of header inclusions
they are going to see multiple typedefs for the same name.  Redundant
"struct foo" declarations are portable C, but redundant "typedef foo"
not so much.

I also wonder if this passes headerscheck and cpluspluscheck.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Making empty Bitmapsets always be NULL
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: stopgap fix for signal handling during restore_command