Re: Why do we have perl and sed versions of Gen_dummy_probes?

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 5/10/21 12:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think this is good practice; it implies that any
>> accidental corruption of the commentary would be carried
>> forward.  I think we should be extracting the commentary
>> from Gen_dummy_probes.sed.

> I don't know how likely accidental corruption is, but OK, let's not make
> the next generation dependent on the current generation of the file. The
> simplest way around that seems to me to cache the perl prolog, as in the
> attached patch Is that more to your liking? I also adjusted it so we
> pick up the first line of code from s2p rather than from the prolog,
> which is now just comments and the #! line.

Works for me.  One other thought --- do we care whether this works
in a VPATH build, and if so does it?  The $< and $@ references should
be OK, but I'm betting you need $(srcdir)/Gen_dummy_probes.pl.prolog
or the like.

			regards, tom lane