Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Kurt Harriman <harriman(at)acm(dot)org> wrote:
>>> Revised patch is attached (4th edition).
>
>> This looks generally sane to me, though it seems entirely imaginable
>> that it might break something, somewhere, for somebody... in which
>> case I suppose we'll adjust as needed.
>
> Looks sane to me too -- committed.  We'll soon see what the buildfarm
> thinks (though the number of non-gcc buildfarm members is depressingly
> small).

I can't feel bad about the near-ubiquity of gcc... life would be a
lot harder if it were otherwise.

...Robert