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 13169.1534352739@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2018-Aug-15, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Back-patching seems a bit aggressive to me considering that the danger
>> is hypothetical.

> That was my first thought too, and my preferred path would be to make
> this master-only and only consider a backpatch later if we find some
> practical reason to do so.

Meh --- the hazards of back-patching seem to me to be more hypothetical
than the benefits.  Still, I seem to be in the minority, so I withdraw
the proposal to back-patch.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq should append auth failures, not overwrite
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq should append auth failures, not overwrite