On Thursday 16 July 2009 16:23:31 Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote: > On 16 Jul 2009, at 14:20, Tom Lane wrote: > > Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <g...@pointblue.com.pl> writes: > >> oh, another thing. > >> stdbool is C99 standard feature. > > > > We are still targeting C89, not C99. > > > > Another reason not to depend on stdbool is that, so far as I can see, > > the standard does not promise that type _Bool has size = 1 byte. > > We have to have that because of on-disk compatibility requirements. > > I think the latter is easily fixable, or forceable to be one byte.
How do you plan to do that? > Why C89, and not C99 ? Virtually all compilers for last 4 years have/ > had C99 support. Well, I think we want to run on systems that are older than 4 years, too. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
