Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Date
Msg-id 182602.1659841092@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2022-08-07 11:47:31 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> So what about strtof?  That's gotta be dead code too.  I gather we
>> still need commit 72880ac1's HAVE_BUGGY_STRTOF.

> Well, right now we don't refuse to build against the "wrong" runtimes, so it's
> hard to say whether you're looking at the right runtime. I don't think we need
> this if we're (as we should imo) only using the ucrt - that's microsoft's,
> which IIUC is ok?

You could pull it out and see if the buildfarm breaks, but my money
is on it breaking.  That HAVE_BUGGY_STRTOF stuff isn't very old.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: failing to build preproc.c on solaris with sun studio