Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)

On 08/24/2018 02:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> On 2018-08-24 14:09:09 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> However, we only support VS2017 down to 9.6 and Vs2015 down to 9.5. Perhaps
>>> we should consider backpatching support for those down to 9.3.
>> Hm, I have no strong objections to that. I don't think it's strictly
>> necessary, given 2013 is supported across the board, but for the non MSVC
>> world, we do fix compiler issues in older branches. There's not that
>> much code for the newer versions afaict?
> +1 for taking a look at how big a patch it would be. But I kind of
> thought we'd intentionally rejected back-patching some of those changes
> to begin with, so I'm not sure the end decision will change.

The VS2017 patch applies cleanly to 9.5, so that seems easy. The VS2015
patch from 9.5 needs a very small amount of adjustment by the look of it
for 9.3 and 9.4, after which I hope the VS2017 patch would again apply
cleanly.

I'll try to put this together.

The trouble with not back patching support to all live branches as new
versions come in is that it acts as a significant discouragement to
buildfarm owners to use the latest Visual Studio versions. I've never
argued stringly on this point before, but I think i'm goiung to ber
inclined to in future.

Meanwhile, I will turn bowerbird back on but just for >= 9.6 for now.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services