Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Gregory Stark wrote:
>> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>>> doxygen's 200-some is clearly an order of magnitude too low, but I
>>>> wonder whether Bruce's list hasn't got some false hits ...
>>>>
>>
>> Skimming the output it does have things like "int" and "float" but
>> presumably
>> we would know if that caused any problem, they wouldn't inflate the
>> numbers
>> much.
>>
>>
>>> 2800 does seem a bit high. My buildfarm member dungbeetle just found
>>> 2482 on a
>>> build that is only missing the optional pam, bonjour and gssapi
>>> config options.
>>>
>>
>> The numbers going to vary heavily from OS to OS so it seems to me
>> that these
>> are a basically the same order of magnitude.
>>
>
> It looks like Windows will blow all our existing numbers out of the
> water. Here's a list generated from Cygwin with 6088 symbols. I'm
> working on getting a similar list from MinGW.
>
> http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=brown_bat&dt=2008-04-18%20230054&stg=typedefs
>
And here are the 7625 from MinGW.
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=dawn_bat&dt=2008-04-19%20004514&stg=typedefs
It looks like we'll need some sort of extra filter.
cheers
andrew
