Re: PG compilation error with Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019

From: Juan José Santamaría Flecha <juanjo(dot)santamaria(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: davinder singh <davindersingh2692(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG compilation error with Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019
Date: 2020-04-10 15:05:26
Message-ID: CAC+AXB3q34+SMkLZMrDobpJnTmeLBhmnBfz7KmpRG=FSppfaFw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 2:25 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> I see that the kind of check you are talking is recently added by
> commit 352f6f2d. I think it is better to be consistent in all places.
> Let's pick one and use that if possible.

Currently there are two constructs to test the same logic, which is not
great. I think that using _MSC_VER makes it seem as MSVC exclusive code,
when MinGW should also be considered.

In the longterm aligning Postgres with MS product obsolescence will make
these tests unneeded, but I can propose a patch for making the test
consistent in all cases, on a different thread since this has little to do
with $SUBJECT.

Regards,

Juan José Santamaría Flecha

>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexey Kondratov 2020-04-10 15:08:59 Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-04-10 15:04:14 pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup?