Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6

On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-08-04 15:45:44 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not sure that there's any great urgency about changing the instances
>> that exist now; the real point of this discussion is that we will allow
>> new code to use static inlines in headers.
>
> I agree that we don't have to (and probably shouldn't) make the required
> configure changes and change definitions. But I do think some of the
> current macro usage deserves to be cleaned up at some point. I,
> somewhere during 9.4 or 9.5, redefined some of the larger macros into
> static inlines and it both reduced the binary size and gave minor
> performance benefits.

We typically recommend that people write their new code like the
existing code. If we say that the standards for new code are now
different from old code in this one way, I don't think that's going to
be very helpful to anyone.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company