| From: | james <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: C++ compiler |
| Date: | 2013-06-25 05:36:51 |
| Message-ID: | 51C92C73.9020408@mansionfamily.plus.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25/06/2013 05:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> It might be time to reconsider whether we should move the baseline
> portability requirement up to C99.
My understanding was that you picked up a lot of users when the Win32
port became useful. While you can build with msys, I would think that
leaving Microsoft's tooling behind would be a mistake, and as far as I
am aware they have said that they are supporting C++11 but not bothering
with C99.
> I'm really not in favor of moving to C++ though, as the
> portability-vs-usefulness tradeoffs seem pretty unattractive there.
As a long-time C++ programmer I don't see what the problem would be
beyond (some) existing contributors being wary of the unknown. Its not
as if any platform developed enough to be a sane db server has not got a
decent C++ compiler or two. Portability is only really a problem with a
subset of new C++11 features.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-06-25 05:39:27 | Re: proposal 9.4 plpgsql: allows access to call stack from GET DIAGNOSTICS statement |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2013-06-25 05:16:17 | Re: Problem building in a directory shared from Mac to Ubuntu |