On 21 November 2017 at 03:53, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > =?UTF-8?Q?Mart=c3=adn_Marqu=c3=a9s?= <mar...@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. > > Yes, this. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
