Andres Freund writes:
The respective macro magic is already in place, its just not used in all
places. The problem is more that we can't easily use it in all places
because e.g. in the one case mentioned here the array isn't in the last
place *in the back branches*.
I don't think we should try to back-patch such changes; there seems too
much risk of breaking third-party code because of the sizeof() issue.
But it'd be a good idea to have it in place before we find ourselves
having to do -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations or some such even in
up-to-date branches.

(I'm actually even more worried about gcc bugs that make this type of
assumption than about intentional changes on their part.)

    regards, tom lane

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 7 of 18 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-hackers @
categoriespostgresql
postedApr 5, '13 at 10:14p
activeJul 23, '13 at 8:30a
posts18
users7
websitepostgresql.org...
irc#postgresql

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase