From: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
  PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
  Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: define bool in pgtypeslib_extern.h
In-Reply-To: <32373.1572110364@sss.pgh.pa.us> (Tom Lane's message of "Sat, 26
	Oct 2019 13:19:24 -0400")
Message-ID: <877e4rmi2y.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk>
References: 
 <CAA4eK1LmaKO7Du9M9Lo=kxGU8sB6aL8fa3sF6z6d5yYYVe3BuQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<16583.1572010913@sss.pgh.pa.us> <18578.1572020755@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAA4eK1LUFKhiq4vfrvG089wtSvnbfAs3sdTFdbuq428bQ7wCzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<32373.1572110364@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (berkeley-unix)
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 20:29:03 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

 Tom> On closer inspection, it seems to be just blind luck. For example,
 Tom> if I rearrange the inclusion order in a file using ecpglib.h:

Ugh.

 Tom> I'm inclined to think that we need to make ecpglib.h's
 Tom> bool-related definitions exactly match c.h,

I'm wondering whether we should actually go the opposite way and say
that c.h's "bool" definition should be backend only, and that in
frontend code we should define a PG_bool type or something of that ilk
for when we want "PG's 1-byte bool" and otherwise let the platform
define "bool" however it wants.

And we certainly shouldn't be defining "bool" in something that's going
to be included in the user's code the way that ecpglib.h is.

-- 
Andrew.