Bruce Momjian wrote:
>Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
>>"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>>I don't understand most of this patch. What difference does changing the
>>>preprocessor test order make?
>>>
>>>
>>I think Bruce was mostly trying to make all the similar tests look
>>alike. Also I agree that "if a && !b" is clearer than "if !b && a";
>>the latter requires a bit more thought to parse the extent of the !
>>operator...
>>
>>
>
>Right, just consistency.
>
>
Ok. I understand now.
I'm not sure exactly what Bruce checked, so I just spent a few cycles
making sure that we did not inadvertantly pick up a define of WIN32 from
windows.h anywhere else. I *think* we are OK on that. However, ISTM this
is a foot just waiting to be shot - in retrospect using WIN32 as our
marker for native Windows, which we do in a great many places (around
300 by my count) was a less than stellar choice, given that it is
defined by windows.h, and especially since we use that header for Cygwin
as well as for Windows native in a few places.
cheers
andrew
