Re: remove pg_restrict workaround

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: remove pg_restrict workaround
Date: 2025-10-29 07:03:53
Message-ID: f2482585-1be0-4545-b7d5-1256f525be8c@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 15.10.25 15:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> When in C11 mode, MSVC supports the standard "restrict" keyword, so we
>> don't need the workaround with using "pg_restrict" instead anymore.
>> (Just for clarification, restrict is a C99 feature, but MSVC only
>> accepts it properly in C11 mode.) So I'm proposing to remove that
>> workaround here, so that code can use the standard restrict keyword
>> without having to worry about the alternative spelling.
>
> Won't this break extensions that are using pg_restrict? Sure, they
> could update their code, but then maybe it wouldn't work anymore
> against previous branches. Seems like it'd be better to leave
> pg_restrict in place (for awhile anyway) but always #define it
> as "restrict". I don't mind ceasing to use it within our own tree
> though.

Committed with a backward compatibility define.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chao Li 2025-10-29 07:05:42 Re: Optimize LISTEN/NOTIFY
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-10-29 07:02:08 Re: Question about InvalidatePossiblyObsoleteSlot()