From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: making EXPLAIN extensible |
Date: | 2025-03-07 16:01:40 |
Message-ID: | 1019989.1741363300@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 9:38 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
>> Also, benign typedef redefinitions are a C11 feature. In practice, all
>> compilers currently in play support it, and the only problem you'll get
>> is from the buildfarm members that are explicitly set up to warn about
>> accidental C11 use. We could probably have a discussion about that, but
>> for this patch set, it's probably better to just deal with the status quo.
> Agreed. +1 for having a discussion at some point, though, because the
> effect of the current rules seems to be that you have to write "struct
> BananaSplit *" in a bunch of places instead of just 'BananaSplit *" to
> avoid redefining the typedef.
I'd be +1 if there's a way to allow that particular thing without
thereby opening the floodgates to every other C11 feature. I expect
not all of C11 is universal yet, so I think the buildfarm animals
that are using -std=gnu99 are mostly doing us a service. But yeah,
this particular thing is a pain in the rear.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2025-03-07 16:02:33 | Re: pg_atomic_compare_exchange_*() and memory barriers |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2025-03-07 15:56:59 | Re: [PATCH] New predefined role pg_manage_extensions |