Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 17:31, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'd like to protest this patch as misguided. AFAICS it is a *seriously*
> Uh, we install the file on Unix, so we should do the same on Windows.
Well, my idea of how to fix that would be the other way 'round.
>> What we really need to be asking is why the pgAdmin folks think
>> they should be including it.
> It is required in order to pull kwlist.h,
No, it is not required. What they should be doing is #define'ing
PG_KEYWORD() in a way that ignores its second argument. See pg_dump's
keywords.c for an example of safe usage.
If we allow this to stand then we are going to find people complaining
that we've broken ABI anytime we make a minor change in the grammar.
I repeat: it's a SERIOUSLY bad idea.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
