Martín Marqu=c3\xA9s <martin@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > While following suggestions from Arthur Zakirov on a patch for > pg_basebackup I found that we are using isatty() in multiple places, but > we don't distinguish the WIN32 code which should use _isatty() as per [1].
I dunno, [1] looks like pure pedantry to me. Unless they intend to stop conforming to POSIX at all, they aren't going to be able to remove the isatty() spelling.
I agree that it's meaningless pedantry, and we should just suppress any warning and get on with our lives.
If you're seeing warnings from use of isatty(), I'd be inclined to think about dealing with it by adding #define _CRT_NONSTDC_NO_WARNINGS, rather than trying to individually #define every affected function.