| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] static assertions in C++ |
| Date: | 2017-12-11 21:29:35 |
| Message-ID: | 97beebd7-6285-eb93-d575-138121ed95b6@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/29/17 10:03, Tom Lane wrote:
> Right now, we have the property that every build enforces static
> assertions, albeit with variable quality of the error messages.
> I strongly disagree that it's okay to throw that property away.
> I do think that we could put an #error here instead, and wait to see
> if anyone complains before expending effort on a workaround.
I guess the question is whether we would rather be able to have users
continue to use older C++ compilers, or be super picky about static
assertions.
In the g++ line, the oldest compiler that supports static assertions is
g++-6, and g++-5 doesn't support it. I think that is recent enough to
be a concern.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-12-11 21:32:31 | Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-12-11 21:16:58 | Re: Jsonb transform for pl/python |