Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
Date
Msg-id 9102.1534983384@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> There's a few further potential cleanups due to relying on c99:
> - Use __func__ unconditionally, rather than having configure test for it
> - Use inline unconditionally, rather than having configure test for it
> - Remove tests for AC_TYPE_INTPTR_T, AC_TYPE_UINTPTR_T,
>   AC_TYPE_LONG_LONG_INT, we can rely on them being present.
> - probably more in that vein

I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to do that, particularly not the
third item.  You are confusing "compiler is c99" with "system headers
are c99".  Moreover, I don't see that we're buying much with such
changes.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)