From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: patch: garbage error strings in libpq |
Date: | 2005-07-09 13:34:13 |
Message-ID: | 42CFD255.9060109@samurai.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl wrote:
> Thank you, that would answer the question. There is no "also" about it;
> it's exactly what I was asking all along. The conclusive answer for us
> would be in the C89 standard of course, where (at least in the draft that
> Neil quoted) I haven't been able to find anything like this. :-(
If in the future when compilers actually do begin applying aggressive
enough optimization that this might be a problem in practice, it seems
likely they will also have updated to C99. It seems a little much to
imagine (a) a compiler that does this in the first place (b) a compiler
that varies its interpretation of sequence points in an extremely subtle
way depending on the dialect of C in use. IOW, I think C99 is sufficient.
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2005-07-09 17:09:15 | Re: patch: garbage error strings in libpq |
Previous Message | jtv | 2005-07-09 13:27:57 | Re: patch: garbage error strings in libpq |