Re: [HACKERS] Decimal64 and Decimal128

Hi,

On 2018-11-12 23:51:35 +0100, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 11:01:33AM +1300, David Rowley wrote:
> > On 13 November 2018 at 10:39, Thomas Munro
> > <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > > ... and it has just been voted into the next revision of the C language:
> > >
> > > https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2018/11/12/c2x/
> >
> > Nice. Maybe we can get DECFLOAT into core around PostgreSQL 32 or so :-)
>
> That's the same schedule we were on for C99, assuming linearity. If
> instead we assume that the speed increases with, say, more developers,
> it seems reasonable to imagine that we'd have optional C2X features in
> PostgreSQL 14 or 15, assuming support for it in at least two common
> compiler toolchains ;)

I don't think developer time is particularly relevant here. C99 adoption
wasn't limited by somebody doing the work to make it so, but the desire
to support some old platforms. I'm personally perfectly fine with being
more aggressive around that, but there are some other quarters that are
more resistant to such ideas... But even if we're more aggressive, 15
seems quite unrealistic - there'll be a lot of platforms that won't have
a bleeding edge version of $compiler.

Greetings,

Andres Freund