From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Minor configure tweak to simplify adjusting gcc warnings |
Date: | 2015-01-14 15:01:39 |
Message-ID: | 21163.1421247699@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2015-01-14 09:34:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, that would only fix my problem if we added a configure-time test
>> for whether gcc recognizes "z", which frankly seems like a waste of
>> cycles. I've probably got the last one left in captivity that doesn't.
> Hm. I had kinda assumed that %z support for sprintf and gcc's
> recognition of the format string would coincide and we could just use
> the %z result. But gull's output doesn't actually that way.
It's only reasonable to assume that gcc matches sprintf if gcc is the
native (vendor-supplied) compiler for the platform. That's not the
case on gaur. It used to be very very commonly not the case, though
I think a lot of vendors have now abandoned their proprietary compilers.
If we were to test for this at all, I think we'd need to make the test
separate from the one for sprintf's behavior.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-01-14 15:04:04 | Re: Minor configure tweak to simplify adjusting gcc warnings |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2015-01-14 14:58:30 | Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |