On Saturday 06 December 2008 22:38:29 James Mansion wrote: > Kurt Harriman wrote: > > The foremost opposing argument seems to have been that there > > should be no attempt to alleviate the existing reserved word > > problem without automatic enforcement to guarantee that never > > in the future can new occurrences be introduced. > > Is there anything in the source that would necessarily preclude using the > C++ compiler to build *all* the code?
Probably lots, but that's not the problem we are trying to solve here. And many people are seriously not interested in using C++ for PostgreSQL. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
