Re: Open items

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I think I have a compromise for --enable-debug: How about if
> > --enable-debug removes optimization, adds -g (or -g3 for macro debugging
> > symbols in gcc), and maybe even enables casserts.
>
> This strikes me as a completely arbitrary set of changes in
> long-established behavior. People who want to turn off optimization
> already know how to do it, and people who want asserts already know

How do you do it? CFLAGS="" configure?

> how to do that. Eliminating the functional difference between these
> --enable options isn't a step forward.

I was looking for something that would be a middle ground, and I thought
a super-debug binary might to it. I do think we should consider -g3 for
gcc. I didn't know it existed, and it does seem nice.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073