| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: C++ compiler |
| Date: | 2013-06-25 02:44:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20130625024442.GE14698@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 06:38:48PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 06/24/2013 05:37 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> >On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 09:21:26PM -0300, Claudio Freire wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>I think the big question is whether you can _control_ what C++ features
> >>>>are used, or whether you are perpetually instructing users what C++
> >>>>features not to use.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>How is that different than us having to do the same with C?
> >>
> >>
> >>Perhaps the size of C++ ?
> >
> >Right. I don't think there are any C features we want to avoid; are
> >there any?
>
> Anything supported by C99 and not other versions I would say.
> However, my point is if done correctly we would state which features
> ahead of time we are willing to use and make them part of the
> developer faq?
Yes, that would be the best approach.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-06-25 03:03:42 | Re: C++ compiler |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2013-06-25 02:40:41 | Re: Patch for fail-back without fresh backup |