2010/1/2 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>:
> On tor, 2009-12-31 at 11:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>> > The definition of c.h is bogus anyway. You might think it contains
>> > includes and defines to set up a portable C environment, which is what
>> > the first half indeed does.
>>
>> > But then things like regproc, transaction ID types, IntArray, varlena,
>> > bytea, oidvector, NameData, etc. do not belong there and should be moved
>> > to postgres.h.
>>
>> Actually, what c.h does is to provide definitions that are needed in
>> both frontend and backend code. And we do NOT want to start including
>> postgres.h in frontend code. It might be that some of the declarations
>> there are useless to frontend code and could be moved, but trying to be
>> as strict as you suggest is only going to create problems.
>
> I think the list above is a pretty good list of things that client code
> doesn't need, plus or minus a few things maybe.
>
Looking closer in c.h, there are several things to move or remove (and
it gets slightly more efficient if we do), but it seems we don't have
such motivation...
Regards,
--
Hitoshi Harada
