Re: WIN32 errno patch

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> At this point, I am just happy we have this WIN32 errno thing working. 

My point is that it isn't "working", it's broken.

> My guess is that we should have two errno's.  One the normal errno that
> is the same on Win32 and Unix and a sockerrno that is conditionally
> defined:

I don't really want to uglify the code by replacing most of the "errno"
uses with "sockerrno".  People know what errno is, they don't know what
"sockerrno" is, so we'd be reducing the readability of the code in order
to cater to Windows cultural imperialism (usual M$ philosophy: embrace,
extend, and make sure Windows-compatible code can't run anywhere else).

Since there are only about three routines in libpq that need access to
"regular" errno, it seems less invasive to #define errno for the rest
of them, and do something special in just these places.

			regards, tom lane