Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-04-05 10:48:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'd really rather not. It might be safe here, because this code
>> only works on Linux anyway, but it's still a dangerous precedent.
> Well, what's the alternative for v10? There's already precedent btw.,
> cf plperl.h undefining bool.
Well, the 0001a patch amounted to undefining bool, once you drop
the redundant typedef redeclaration. So that's a direction we have
some track record with.
regards, tom lane