Re: unconstify equivalent for volatile

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: unconstify equivalent for volatile
Date: 2019-02-18 15:43:50
Message-ID: 18194.1550504630@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I propose to add an equivalent to unconstify() for volatile. When
> working on this, I picked the name unvolatize() mostly as a joke, but it
> appears it's a real word. Other ideas?

Umm ... wouldn't this amount to papering over actual bugs? I can
think of legitimate reasons to cast away const, but casting away
volatile seems pretty dangerous, and not something to encourage
by making it notationally easy.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Banck 2019-02-18 15:52:48 Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-02-18 15:42:33 Re: unconstify equivalent for volatile