Re: Mostly Harmless: Welcoming our C++ friends

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>, Kurt Harriman <harriman(at)acm(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Mostly Harmless: Welcoming our C++ friends
Date: 2008-12-07 09:01:21
Message-ID: 200812071101.21951.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Saturday 06 December 2008 22:38:29 James Mansion wrote:
> Kurt Harriman wrote:
> > The foremost opposing argument seems to have been that there
> > should be no attempt to alleviate the existing reserved word
> > problem without automatic enforcement to guarantee that never
> > in the future can new occurrences be introduced.
>
> Is there anything in the source that would necessarily preclude using the
> C++ compiler to build *all* the code?

Probably lots, but that's not the problem we are trying to solve here. And
many people are seriously not interested in using C++ for PostgreSQL.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Unicron 2008-12-07 10:06:44 problem i get for Patch "blomming filter"
Previous Message Hitoshi Harada 2008-12-07 08:42:33 Re: Windowing Function Patch Review -> Standard Conformance