| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: minor compiler warning on OpenBSD |
| Date: | 2007-07-11 23:18:17 |
| Message-ID: | 4522.1184195897@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> My local manpage for strftime says that we can get around this warning
> by overloading it with something like
> size_t
> my_strftime(char *s, size_t max, const char *fmt,
> const struct tm *tm)
> {
> return strftime(s, max, fmt, tm);
> }
Hey, that works nicely. On my version of gcc, it suppresses the warning
even if my_strftime is marked "static inline", which should mean that
there's no runtime penalty.
I've committed the patch to HEAD --- Stefan, would you check if it
silences your version of gcc?
Now if we could only get rid of those flex-induced warnings in ecpg...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-11 23:36:18 | Re: [GENERAL] Count(*) throws error |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-07-11 23:08:48 | Re: doubt |