Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
Date: 2016-02-12 14:41:35
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYTUS2uH4S0+cWsab2wXW6gQnOR0m7daXnNChw3nRqZqQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>>> E.g. if you include stdbool.h [ ginStepRight breaks ]
>
>> Ah-ha. OK, now I get it. So then I agree we should back-patch this
>> at least as far as 9.3 where MSVC 2013 became a supported platform,
>
> Um, no, that does not follow. The unanswered question here is why,
> when we *have not* included stdbool.h and *have* typedef'd bool as
> just plain "char", we would get C99 bool behavior. There is something
> happening there that should not be happening, and I'm not really satisfied
> with the explanation "Microsoft is brain-dead as usual". I think we
> should dig deeper, because whatever is going on there may have deeper
> effects than we now realize.

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d2106c2d-0f46-4cf9-af27-54f81ef6e20c@postgrespro.ru
seems to explain what happens pretty clearly. We #include something
which #includes something which #includes something which #includes
<stdbool.h>. It's not that surprising, is it? I mean, things with
"std" in the name figure to be commonly-included.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-02-12 14:43:26 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring.
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-02-12 14:39:30 Re: CustomScan in a larger structure (RE: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c)