Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c
Date
Msg-id 10084.1534371501@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-08-15 14:05:29 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Still want to argue for no backpatch?

> I'm a bit confused. Why did you just backpatch this ~two hours after
> people objected to the idea?  Even if it were during my current work
> hours, I don't even read mail that often if I'm hacking on something
> complicated.

If a consensus emerges to deal with this some other way, reverting
isn't hard.  But I think it's pretty clear at this point that we're
dealing with real bugs versus entirely hypothetical bugs, and that's
not a decision that's hard to make IMO.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c
Next
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: xact_start meaning when dealing with procedures?