Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYTUS2uH4S0+cWsab2wXW6gQnOR0m7daXnNChw3nRqZqQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: >>> E.g. if you include stdbool.h [ ginStepRight breaks ] > >> Ah-ha. OK, now I get it. So then I agree we should back-patch this >> at least as far as 9.3 where MSVC 2013 became a supported platform, > > Um, no, that does not follow. The unanswered question here is why, > when we *have not* included stdbool.h and *have* typedef'd bool as > just plain "char", we would get C99 bool behavior. There is something > happening there that should not be happening, and I'm not really satisfied > with the explanation "Microsoft is brain-dead as usual". I think we > should dig deeper, because whatever is going on there may have deeper > effects than we now realize. http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d2106c2d-0f46-4cf9-af27-54f81ef6e20c@postgrespro.ru seems to explain what happens pretty clearly. We #include something which #includes something which #includes something which #includes <stdbool.h>. It's not that surprising, is it? I mean, things with "std" in the name figure to be commonly-included. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: