* From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Christian Ullrich <chris(at)chrullrich(dot)net> writes:
> > * Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Hm, my grep found another one ...
>
> > Oh, sorry. I saw that one, but thought it was intentional because _WIN64
> > is defined automatically anyway.
>
> Oh? Then we should not need that one (the /D switch in win32.mak) at all.
> Should we just remove it?
We have both confirmed several times that nothing depends on it. I think it can go.
--
Christian