On 16 August 2016 at 17:08, Piotr Stefaniak <postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me> wrote: > On 2016-08-16 18:33, Robert Haas wrote: >> It wouldn't be that much work to maintain, either: we'd >> just set up some buildfarm members that compiled using C++ and when >> they turned red, we'd go fix it. > > I think that there exist subtle differences between C and C++ that > without compile-time diagnostic could potentially lead to different > run-time behavior.
It seems to me that if we were really keen on attaching in another "totally compiled" language, that C++ wouldn't seem like the best choice. As you say, it's subtly different, which seems a bit dangerous to me. Further, it's not as if C++ is particularly newer than C. C is about 45 years old; C++, at 33, hardly seems like a "spry young whippersnapper" whose inclusion ought to lead to vast excitement. The would-be "spry young things" that head to my mind are Rust and Go. I'm not sure it's terribly plausible to have parts of Postgres written in both C and (Rust|Go); they're different enough that I'm not sure what functionality would mix sensibly. But I think that would be more interesting, all the same. Perhaps it would work out well to be able to create background workers in Rust, or to implement a stored procedure language in Go. -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
