On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.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.

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

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to