From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Support pg_attribute_aligned and noreturn in MSVC |
Date: | 2022-09-21 12:21:58 |
Message-ID: | CAAaqYe_5nexRX45HPaep-Zkkn3ye-eacKaQ0uRwZ5oh5FajTig@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 9:18 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 08:01:20AM -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> > I don't have access to a Windows machine for testing, but re-reading
> > the documentation it looks like the issue is that our noreturn macro
> > is used after the definition while the MSVC equivalent is used before.
>
> A CI setup would do the job for example, see src/tools/ci/README that
> explains how to set up things.
That's a good reminder; I've been meaning to set that up but haven't
taken the time yet.
> > I've removed that for now (and commented about it); it's not as
> > valuable anyway since it's mostly an indicator for code analysis
> > (human and machine).
>
> Except for the fact that the patch missed to define
> pg_attribute_noreturn() in the MSVC branch, this looks fine to me. I
> have been looking at what you meant with packing, and I can see the
> business with PACK(), something actually doable with gcc.
>
> That's a first step, at least, and I see no reason not to do it, so
> applied.
Thanks!
James Coleman
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2022-09-21 13:08:51 | Re: Summary function for pg_buffercache |
Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-09-21 12:17:30 | Re: [PATCH] polish the error message of creating proc |