On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 6:37 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Meh. We support ancient versions of C for backwards compatibility >> reasons, but considering that compiling backend code with C++ isn't >> officially supported at all, I'm not sure we need to cater to ancient >> C++ compilers. We could quibble about the value of "ancient" of >> course --- Peter, do you have an idea when this construct became >> widely supported? >> >> I do think it might be a better idea to put a #error there instead >> of silently disabling static assertions. Then at least we could >> hope to get complaints if anyone *is* trying to use ancient C++, >> and thereby gauge whether it's worth working any harder for this. > > I guess my question was whether we couldn't just use the same > workaround we use for old C compilers.
This got unanswered and the thread has stalled for two months, so for now I am marking the patch as returned with feedback. -- Michael
