Re: Expanding the use of FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER for declarations like foo[1]

On 2015-02-19 07:10:19 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 2015-02-18 17:15:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> >> - I don't think that the t_bits fields in htup_details.h should be
> >> >> updated either.
> >> >
> >> > Why not? Any not broken code should already use MinHeapTupleSize and
> >> > similar macros.
> >>
> >> Changing t_bits impacts HeapTupleHeaderData, ReorderBufferTupleBuf and
> >> similarly a couple of redo routines in heapam.c using
> >> HeapTupleHeaderData in a couple of structures not placing it at the
> >> end (compiler complains).
> >
> > The compiler will complain if you use a FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER in the
> > middle of a struct but not when when you embed a struct that uses it
> > into the middle another struct. At least gcc doesn't and I think it'd be
> > utterly broken if another compiler did that. If there's a compiler that
> > does so, we need to make it define FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER to 1.
>
> clang does complain on my OSX laptop regarding that ;)

I think that then puts the idea of doing it for those structs pretty
much to bed.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services