Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2022-08-07 11:47:31 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> So what about strtof? That's gotta be dead code too. I gather we
>> still need commit 72880ac1's HAVE_BUGGY_STRTOF.
> Well, right now we don't refuse to build against the "wrong" runtimes, so it's
> hard to say whether you're looking at the right runtime. I don't think we need
> this if we're (as we should imo) only using the ucrt - that's microsoft's,
> which IIUC is ok?
You could pull it out and see if the buildfarm breaks, but my money
is on it breaking. That HAVE_BUGGY_STRTOF stuff isn't very old.
regards, tom lane
