pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Sandeep Thakkar <sandeep.thakkar@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Subject: Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:36:59 -0400
Message-ID: <22855.1535135819@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e9fb6b45-adbe-1bb4-0456-92e656220b93@2ndQuadrant.com>
References: <1d5946a3-aa85-a3ec-c8aa-b3e9b66dd5d9@commandprompt.com>
	<20180821204936.tqdmjolkoo2sv5og@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<303572b3-89a5-6177-d46a-e23b2b4d6caa@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<20180821232952.ixj6kgccoqcjp5gf@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CANFyU94+wn2iN_ry=2SZFzxdFP6vAHA2+K0uhyyCS4YQWyyrxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180822120211.prl6uxspai4lahfs@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<20180823000905.fjthfohmczss4fiw@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<20180823013134.3h4j62eeiaibpgvo@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<eedbe1a9-1d3f-e878-7695-fe9b529f3239@2ndquadrant.com>
	<20180824014434.qourppnik7bmsib6@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<20180824154623.i32aryx4bzfa4gxu@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<e9fb6b45-adbe-1bb4-0456-92e656220b93@2ndQuadrant.com>

Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> I saw Tom's answer, and it will work as far as it goes. But maybe we 
> should look at doing that in configure instead of putting the onus on 
> all buildfarm owners? It already knows if it's using a GNU compiler, not 
> sure how ubiquitous the -ansi and -std=c99 flags are.

No, the only reason either of us are doing that is to force use of a
flag that's different from what configure would select by default
(which evidently is -std=gnu99 for gcc).  Most buildfarm owners have
no need to do anything.

			regards, tom lane




view thread (37+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <22855.1535135819@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../22855.1535135819@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/22855.1535135819@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com, andres@anarazel.de, sandeep.thakkar@enterprisedb.com, peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, jd@commandprompt.com, thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com, david@pgmasters.net, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, craig@2ndquadrant.com
  Subject: Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)
  In-Reply-To: <22855.1535135819@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox