Hi, On August 24, 2019 2:37:55 PM PDT, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: >> On August 24, 2019 1:57:56 PM PDT, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> >wrote: >>> So we're depending on APIs that upstream doesn't think are stable? > >> Seawasp iirc builds against the development branch of llvm, which >explains why we see failures there. Does that address what you are >concerned about? If not, could you expand? > >I know it's the development branch. The question is whether this >breakage is something *they* ought to be fixing. If not, I'm >worried that we're too much in bed with implementation details >of LLVM that we shouldn't be depending on.
Don't think so - it's a C++ standard feature in the version of the standard LLVM is based on. So it's pretty reasonable for them to drop their older backwards compatible function. Access -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
