"Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> Here is a second attempt, hope it's closer to what you expected.
Better --- patch applied with some minor editorialization.
> I still left two #ifdefs in there, for the addition and subtraction of
> timeval:s specifically. They could be made functions/macros too, just
> not sure if it's worth it.
Probably not. What bothers me more is the unconditional use of a
static inline function; but IIRC we are only supporting gcc-based builds
on Windows, so that probably isn't worth fixing either.
regards, tom lane