On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:59 PM, David G. Johnston
<david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I don't understand PGDLLEXPORT...
We're talking about PGDLLIMPORT.
> The PostgreSQL function/feature in question is already in place and can be
> accessed by someone using Linux or other unix-like variant. But it cannot
> be access by our Window's users because we failed to add a PGDLLEXPORT
> somewhere. If it is our goal to treat Windows and Linux/Unix equally then
> that discrepancy is on its face a bug. The fact we don't catch these until
> some third-party points it out doesn't make it any less a bug.
If we had a policy of putting PGDLLIMPORT on everything, I'd agree
with you, but we clearly don't. Something's only a bug if we intended
A but accidentally got B. If we intended and got A and somebody
doesn't like that, that's not a bug; that's a difference of opinion.
I personally feel that we should sprinkle PGDLLIMPORT markings onto a
lot more things, but Tom Lane has opposed that at every turn. I hope
we'll change our policy about that someday, but that's a different
question from whether such changes should be back-patched.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
