| From: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types |
| Date: | 2017-10-03 13:42:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAE2gYzxezZwRaWYJAD25VAPVDuftPrjBQ=Ed2Rv3QT8TzU2=0w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Uh, I thought pg_hypot() was still needed on our oldest supported
> platforms. Or is hypot() already supported there? If not, I suppose we
> can keep the HYPOT() macro, and have it use hypot() on platforms that
> have it and pg_hypot elsewhere? That particular fraction of 0001 seemed
> a bit dubious to me, as the largest possible source of platform
> dependency issues.
What is our oldest supported platform?
We can also just keep pg_hypot(). I don't think getting rid of it
justifies much work.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-10-03 13:44:01 | Re: Possible SSL improvements for a newcomer to tackle |
| Previous Message | Emre Hasegeli | 2017-10-03 13:38:33 | Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types |