From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: make pg_attribute_noreturn() work for msvc? |
Date: | 2019-11-15 13:36:19 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmobMZ0xZ4sSsEsdE9p8OQDqJXvRw0C_6smbc7a31JkMNOQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 11:28 AM Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 2019-Nov-12, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Anyway, I still like the idea of merging the void keyword in with
> > > that.
> >
> > Hm. Any other opinions?
>
> Although it feels very strange to me at first glance, one only has to
> learn the trick once. My initial inclination was not to do it, but I'm
> kinda +0.1 after thinking some more about it.
I don't care much about this either way, but I think I might be
slightly more inclined to keep them separate. If we went the
direction of combining them, it might be clearer if the magic word
included "void" someplace inside of it, like:
extern void_noreturn thunk(void);
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2019-11-15 13:49:02 | Re: JIT performance bug/regression & JIT EXPLAIN |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-11-15 13:30:21 | Re: Creating foreign key on partitioned table is too slow |