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

On 22/08/2018 14:02, Andres Freund wrote:
> If we agree on that, I'm going to propose a patch that includes:
> - relevant cleanups to configure
> - adapts sources.sgml to refer to C99 instead of C89
> - add some trivial conversions to for(int i;;) and struct initializers,
>   so the relevant old animals fail
> - adds a configure check to enable errors with vla usage (-Werror=vla)

sounds good

> - do we want to make declarations at arbitrary points errors? It's
>   already a warning currently.

While there are legitimate criticisms, it's a standard feature in C,
C++, and many other languages, so I don't see what we'd gain by fighting it.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services