Re: clang 15 doesn't like our JIT code

Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> there's also the walker stuff[1] to address.

Yeah. I just did some experimentation with that, and it looks like
neither gcc nor clang will cut you any slack at all for declaring
an argument as "void *": given say

typedef bool (*tree_walker_callback) (Node *node, void *context);

the walker functions also have to be declared with exactly "void *"
as their second argument. So it's going to be just as messy and
full-of-casts as we feared. Still, I'm not sure we have any
alternative.

regards, tom lane