Re: cpluspluscheck vs ICU

Hi,

On 2023-03-10 20:10:30 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-03-10 19:37:27 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I just hit this once more - and I figured out a fairly easy fix:
> > 
> > We just need a
> >   #ifndef U_DEFAULT_SHOW_DRAFT
> >   #define U_DEFAULT_SHOW_DRAFT 0
> >   #endif
> > before including unicode/ucol.h.
> > 
> > At first I was looking at
> >   #define U_SHOW_CPLUSPLUS_API 0
> > and
> >   #define U_HIDE_INTERNAL_API 1
> > which both work, but they are documented to be internal.
> 
> Err. Unfortunately only the U_SHOW_CPLUSPLUS_API approach actually works. The
> others don't, not quite sure what I was doing earlier.
> 
> So it's either relying on a define marked as internal, or the below:
> 
> > Alternatively we could emit U_DEFAULT_SHOW_DRAFT 0 into pg_config.h to avoid
> > that issue.
> > 
> > 
> > The only other thing I see is to do something like:
> > [ugly]
> > which seems mighty ugly.

The ICU docs talk about it like it's not really internal:
https://github.com/unicode-org/icu/blob/720e5741ccaa112c4faafffdedeb7459b66c5673/docs/processes/release/tasks/healthy-code.md#test-icu4c-headers

So I'm inclined to go with that solution.

Any comments? Arguments against?

Greetings,

Andres Freund