Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0

On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Since gcc 4.8 is going to be on a lot of people's machines pretty soon,
> I think we need to do something to prevent it from breaking 8.4.x and
> 9.0.x. It looks like our choices are (1) teach configure to enable
> -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations if the compiler recognizes it,
> or (2) back-port commit 8137f2c32322c624e0431fac1621e8e9315202f9.
>
> I'm a bit leaning towards (1), mainly because I'm not excited about

I'm confused. I would have described (1) as entering an arms race.
Each new optimization related to arrays and structs would need a new
flag. Whereas (2) makes the code pretty common traditional code that
gcc is going to need to tolerate for the foreseeable future

--
greg