Tom-
I think that I can allay your concerns. Please give me a day or so to
put together my more complete thoughts on the matter. I'll be in touch.
-Ed
On Sat, Mar 1, 2025 at 11:33 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Ed Behn <e...@behn.us> writes:
> >> There is actually no new code. Code is simply moved from numeric.c to
> >> numeric.h.
>
> I will absolutely not hold still for that. It would mean that any
> time we want to think about messing with the contents of numerics,
> we need to examine more or less the whole Postgres code base to see
> what else is poking into those structures.
>
> If we must do something like this, then a separate header
> "numeric_internal.h" or something like that would reduce the blast
> radius for changes. But IMO you still haven't made an acceptable case
> for deciding that these data structures aren't private to numeric.c.
> What behaviors do you actually need that aren't accessible via the
> existing exported functons?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
