Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6

On 2015-08-05 11:12:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > Ok, lets' do it that way then. It seems the easiest way to test for this
> > is to use something like
>
> > # "IBM XL C/C++ for AIX, V12.1" miscompiles, for 32-bit, some inline
> > # expansions of ginCompareItemPointers() "long long" arithmetic. To
> > # take advantage of inlining, build a 64-bit PostgreSQL.
> > test $(getconf HARDWARE_BITMODE) == '32' then
> > CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -DPG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE"
> > fi
>
> > in the xlc part of the template?

(there's a ; missing and it should be CPPFLAGS rather than CFLAGS)

> Actually, much the easiest way to convert what Noah did would be to add
>
> #if defined(__ILP32__) && defined(__IBMC__)
> #define PG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE
> #endif
>
> in src/include/port/aix.h.

I'm ok with that too, although I do like the warning at configure
time. I'd go with the template approach due to that, but I don't feel
strongly about it.

Andres