Re: Proposal: Make use of C99 designated initialisers for nulls/values arrays

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposal: Make use of C99 designated initialisers for nulls/values arrays
Date: 2019-10-18 13:03:31
Message-ID: 20191018130331.GZ6962@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greetings,

* Chapman Flack (chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net) wrote:
> On 10/18/19 08:18, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I realize that I need to don some fireproof gear for suggesting this,
> > but I really wonder how much fallout we'd have from just allowing {} to
> > be used.. It's about a billion[1] times cleaner and more sensible than
> > using {0} and doesn't create a dependency on what the first element of
> > the struct is..
>
> I guess the non-flamey empirical question would be, if it's not ISO C,
> are we supporting any compiler that doesn't understand it?

Right, that's basically what I was trying to ask. :)

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Colin Watson 2019-10-18 13:21:30 Backport "WITH ... AS MATERIALIZED" syntax to <12?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-10-18 13:00:14 Re: Clean up MinGW def file generation