On Thursday 16 July 2009 16:23:31 Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote:
> On 16 Jul 2009, at 14:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj@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.