| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Pierre Ducroquet <pierre(dot)ducroquet(at)people-doc(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v9.1 |
| Date: | 2018-02-15 17:23:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20180215172310.dk66viy727xxyvgs@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-02-15 12:54:34 +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> 1) Why does config/llvm.m4 modify CPPFLAGS? That affects the building of the
> binaries too which may be done with gcc like in my case. Shouldn't it use a
> LLVM_CPPFLAGS or something?
Well, most of the time cppflags just are things like additional include
directories. And the established precedent is to just add those to the
global cppflags (c.f. libxml stuff in configure in). I've no problem
changing this, I just followed established practice.
> 2) When I build with --with-cassert I expect the assertions to be there,
> both in the binaries and the bitcode. Is that just a bug or is there any
> thought behind this?
Not sure what you mean by that. NDEBUG and cassert are independent
mechanisms, no?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-02-15 18:00:39 | Re: Let's remove DSM_INPL_NONE. |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-02-15 17:19:46 | Add void cast to StaticAssertExpr? |