From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: flexible array members |
Date: | 2011-06-15 22:19:06 |
Message-ID: | 5610.1308176346@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:
> Is this a route we want to go down?
> - GISTENTRY vector[1]; /* variable-length array */
> + GISTENTRY vector[FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER];
Yes, I was thinking about the same trick after noting these warnings on
Fedora 15, although personally I'd name the macro VARIABLE_LENGTH_ARRAY.
> One thing that is a bit concerning is that throwing more flexible array
> members around the code wherever variable-length arrays are used results
> in crash and burn. Probably some places are using sizeof or offsetof on
> these structures in incompatible ways. So each place would have to be
> examined separately.
Hmm, that's nasty. But from a code-documentation standpoint I think
this is a useful improvement, so it seems worth doing the work to clean
things up.
(I do recall a number of places that assume that sizeof() includes a
single array element ...)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-06-15 23:02:47 | Re: On-the-fly index tuple deletion vs. hot_standby |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-06-15 21:54:56 | Re: FK NOT VALID can't be deferrable? |