From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kurt Harriman <harriman(at)acm(dot)org> |
Cc: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions |
Date: | 2009-12-16 05:42:00 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070912152142v1a10d2e5j5daee8d4accba2f0@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Kurt Harriman <harriman(at)acm(dot)org> wrote:
>> Your worry ii) can be ignored, managing to compile on such
>> compilers is already overachievement.
>
> I think so too. With your opinion added to mine, do we constitute a
> consensus of the pg community? Someone might object that a sample of
> two individuals is insufficiently representative of the whole, but
> away with the pedants: let us not quibble over trifles.
I haven't completely followed this thread, but I think there has been
some discussion of making changes to inline that would cause
regressions for people using old, crappy compilers, and I think we
should avoid doing that unless there is some compelling benefit. I'm
not sure what that benefit would be - I don't think "cleaner code" is
enough.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-12-16 05:58:32 | [PATCH] Cleanup existing PG privileges - database, schema |
Previous Message | Kurt Harriman | 2009-12-16 03:34:40 | Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions |