| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz> |
| Subject: | Re: RustgreSQL |
| Date: | 2017-01-08 14:23:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAMsr+YHNXZf8HKGcnG7t6bczxq_GaUk23qnYYsPuriiCK4BCrw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8 Jan. 2017 18:14, "Fabien COELHO" <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
Is this completely unrealistic or is it carved in stone PostgreSQL will
>> always be a C project forever and ever?
>>
>
> From my very limited understanding, PostgreSQL is more likely to be
> converted to C++!
>
ISTM that currently pg is written C89. Personnaly I think that C99
(standard from 18 years ago...) would be a progress, but this has been
rejected in the past because of portability issues on some platforms (eg MS
Visual C++ started to support part of C99 in ... 2013).
MSVC was really the main issue. MS really insisted that C++ was the future
and C99 was a pointless diversion.
I kinda agree with them TBH, albeit with a preference for a small-ish and
carefully used subset of C++. But they've recognised that it matters to
enough people to add support now anyways. I suspect their increased
interest in open source and Linux is related.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-01-08 14:28:56 | Re: RustgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2017-01-08 14:19:30 | Re: RustgreSQL |