| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: perl 5.36, C99, -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wshadow=compatible-local |
| Date: | 2022-12-29 21:40:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20221229214013.y5i3ovlrhrc2dbaj@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-12-29 13:51:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> We might find that some GCC-impostor compilers have trouble with it,
> but if so we can adjust the #ifdef here.
Yea. I suspect it's widely enough used that any compiler claiming to be gcc
compatible has it, but ...
> Getting nitpicky, I suggest calling it "HAVE_PRAGMA_GCC_SYSTEM_HEADER"
> to align better with what you actually have to write.
Makes sense.
> + * Newer versions the perl headers trigger a lot of warnings with our compiler
>
> "Newer versions of ..." please. Otherwise LGTM.
Oops.
> > Should we backpatch this? Given the volume of warnings it's probably a good
> > idea. But I'd let it step in HEAD for a few days of buildfarm coverage first.
>
> +1 to both points.
Pushed to HEAD.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-12-29 21:54:37 | Re: postgres_fdw uninterruptible during connection establishment / ProcSignalBarrier |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-12-29 21:37:45 | Re: postgres_fdw uninterruptible during connection establishment / ProcSignalBarrier |