Re: LLVM / clang

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LLVM / clang
Date: 2010-07-08 20:39:47
Message-ID: 2380.1278621587@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> So, clang 2.7 didn't fix it. Do we want to proceed with my patch or
> leave clang unsupported?

Given that the patch breaks plperl, I'd vote no ... but in any case
right now is not the time to be applying it. Maybe it would be useful
to put it in HEAD after we branch 9.0.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2010-07-08 21:09:58 Re: ALTER TABLE SET STATISTICS requires AccessExclusiveLock
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-07-08 20:17:42 Re: LLVM / clang