Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>, Sandeep Thakkar <sandeep.thakkar@enterprisedb.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2018-08-24T18:38:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-08-24 14:09:09 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> However, we only support VS2017 down to 9.6 and Vs2015 down to 9.5. Perhaps
>> we should consider backpatching support for those down to 9.3.

> Hm, I have no strong objections to that.   I don't think it's strictly
> necessary, given 2013 is supported across the board, but for the non MSVC
> world, we do fix compiler issues in older branches.  There's not that
> much code for the newer versions afaict?

+1 for taking a look at how big a patch it would be.  But I kind of
thought we'd intentionally rejected back-patching some of those changes
to begin with, so I'm not sure the end decision will change.

			regards, tom lane


Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Remove test for VA_ARGS, implied by C99.

  2. Introduce minimal C99 usage to verify compiler support.

  3. Require C99 (and thus MSCV 2013 upwards).

  4. Require a C99-compliant snprintf(), and remove related workarounds.

  5. Try to enable C99 in configure, but do not rely on it (yet).

  6. Make snprintf.c follow the C99 standard for snprintf's result value.

  7. Clean up assorted misuses of snprintf()'s result value.