Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6
Date: 2015-08-17 14:33:20
Message-ID: CAHyXU0wVbujf0RmNHFgH-CfYH2VjTQpUsew6VQD9nhMMqEv78A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> During the 9.5 cycle, and earlier, the topic of increasing our minimum
> bar for compilers came up a bunch of times. Specifically whether we
> still should continue to use C90 as a baseline.

Minor question: is there any value to keeping the client side code to
older standards? On a previous project compiled libpq on many legacy
architectures because we were using it as frontend to backup software.
The project didn't end up taking off so it's no big deal to me, but
just throwing it out there: libpq has traditionally enjoyed broader
compiler support than the full project (borland, windows back in the
day).

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-08-17 14:48:25 Re: Error message with plpgsql CONTINUE
Previous Message Greg Stark 2015-08-17 14:29:58 Re: what would tar file FDW look like?