On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 12:22:48AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah, the comment needs an update; but if we have four implementations > then it ought to describe each of them, IMO.
I got an idea as per the attached. Perhaps you have a better idea? -- Michael
diff --git a/src/include/c.h b/src/include/c.h index 831c89f473..6731861da5 100644 --- a/src/include/c.h +++ b/src/include/c.h @@ -836,9 +836,13 @@ extern void ExceptionalCondition(const char *conditionName, * The macro StaticAssertDecl() is suitable for use at file scope (outside of * any function). * - * Otherwise we fall back on a kluge that assumes the compiler will complain - * about a negative width for a struct bit-field. This will not include a - * helpful error message, but it beats not getting an error at all. + * On recent C++ compilers, we can use standard static_assert() for all + * types of static assertions. + * + * Otherwise, for the C and C++ fallback implementations, we fall back on + * a kluge that assumes the compiler will complain about a negative width + * for a struct bit-field. This will not include a helpful error message, + * but it beats not getting an error at all. */ #ifndef __cplusplus #ifdef HAVE__STATIC_ASSERT
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
