Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 00:20, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> >> Seems kind of buggy. �They shouldn't be defining it at all.
>
> > Why not? Should they just stop using it? In that case, so should we, no?
>
> What's buggy is M$ failing to provide it in their <sys/types.h> header.
> It's unlikely they'll pay any attention to our opinions, however.
>
> I think the Python guys are up against the same problem as us, namely
> substituting for the platform's failure to define the type.
I am unclear if accepting what Python chose as a default is the right
route vs. doing more research.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
