Re: unconstify()/unvolatize() vs g++/clang++

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: unconstify()/unvolatize() vs g++/clang++
Date: 2023-12-11 09:17:51
Message-ID: 47f623a0-8d66-48cd-8dd4-58e3db603a02@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11.12.23 01:42, Thomas Munro wrote:
> AFAICS you can't use unconstify()/unvolatize() in a static inline
> function in a .h file, or in a .cpp file, because
> __builtin_types_compatible_p is only available in C, not C++. Seems
> like a reasonable thing to want to be able to do, no? I'm not
> immediately sure what the right fix is; would #if
> defined(HAVE__BUILTIN_TYPES_COMPATIBLE_P) && !defined(__cplusplus)
> around the relevant versions of constify()/unvolatize() be too easy?

That seems right to me.

If you are slightly more daring, you can write an alternative definition
in C++ using const_cast?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2023-12-11 09:27:58 Re: Streaming I/O, vectored I/O (WIP)
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2023-12-11 09:12:05 Re: Streaming I/O, vectored I/O (WIP)