| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unconstify equivalent for volatile |
| Date: | 2019-02-18 20:18:42 |
| Message-ID: | 03081802-8268-cc86-fab7-e5562d54532d@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 18/02/2019 16:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> I propose to add an equivalent to unconstify() for volatile. When
>> working on this, I picked the name unvolatize() mostly as a joke, but it
>> appears it's a real word. Other ideas?
>
> Umm ... wouldn't this amount to papering over actual bugs? I can
> think of legitimate reasons to cast away const, but casting away
> volatile seems pretty dangerous, and not something to encourage
> by making it notationally easy.
>
I'd argue that it's not making it easier to do but rather easier to spot
(vs normal type casting) which is IMO a good thing from patch review
perspective.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-18 20:20:55 | Re: unconstify equivalent for volatile |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-18 19:49:29 | Re: Missing Column names with multi-insert |