Re: [HACKERS] static assertions in C++ - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [HACKERS] static assertions in C++
Date
Msg-id 20171129182250.s6y6gtig5ioibi7i@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] static assertions in C++  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] static assertions in C++  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2017-11-29 09:41:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > I'd still like a review of this patch.
> 
> I don't think there's much to review apart from this one issue.
> Neither Tom nor I seem to be convinced about:
> 
> +/* not worth providing a workaround */

FWIW, I think that's a perfectly reasonable choice. Adding complications
in making static assertions work for random archaic compilers when
compiling with c++ just doesn't seem worth more than a few mins of
thought.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Shubham Barai
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017 : Patch for predicate locking in Gist index
Next
From: Emre Hasegeli
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Improve geometric types