Re: numeric_big in make check?

> On 19 Feb 2024, at 12:48, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:

>> To make sure it's executed and not silently breaks, is it time to add this to
>> the regular make check?
>
> Or we could just flush it. It's never detected a bug, and I think
> you'd find that it adds zero code coverage (or if not, we could
> fix that in a far more surgical and less expensive manner).

I don't have a problem with that, there isn't much value in keeping it
(especially when not connected to make check so that it actually runs). That
also means we can remove two make targets which hadn't been ported to meson to
get us a hair closer to parity.

--
Daniel Gustafsson