Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 23820.1455216330@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2016-02-11 13:37:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Absolutely; they don't work safely for testing bits that aren't in the >> rightmost byte of a flag word, for instance. I'm on board with making >> these fixes, I'm just unconvinced that stdbool is a good reason for it. > Oh, ok. Interactions with stdbool was what made me looking into this, > that's primarily why I mentioned it. What's your thinking about > back-patching, independent of that then? Well, Yury was saying upthread that some MSVC versions have a problem with the existing coding, which would be a reason to back-patch ... but I'd like to see a failing buildfarm member first. Don't particularly want to promise to support compilers not represented in the farm. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: