Question about bit.h and bit.c

Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu> writes:

Why is it that bit.h is in src/include/utils and bit.c is in
src/backend/lib ?

Possibly a more interesting question is why haven't we ditched them both
... AFAICT none of the bit.c routines are used anymore.

regards, tom lane

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

Tom> Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu> writes:

Why is it that bit.h is in src/include/utils and bit.c is in
src/backend/lib ?

Tom> Possibly a more interesting question is why haven't we
Tom> ditched them both ... AFAICT none of the bit.c routines are
Tom> used anymore.

True. I just searched and found the only uses of the bitmask functions
(now greatly expanded) in our code :-)

--
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh

Files removed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote:

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

Tom> Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu> writes:

Why is it that bit.h is in src/include/utils and bit.c is in
src/backend/lib ?

Tom> Possibly a more interesting question is why haven't we
Tom> ditched them both ... AFAICT none of the bit.c routines are
Tom> used anymore.

True. I just searched and found the only uses of the bitmask functions
(now greatly expanded) in our code :-)

--
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073