| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>,Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_recvlogical.c doesn't build with --disable-integer-datetimes |
| Date: | 2017-02-17 21:18:19 |
| Message-ID: | 51AD1BC1-E139-4F8C-BC6D-267F5E81F196@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On February 17, 2017 1:13:10 PM PST, Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>How about we add (some of) these extra warnings, plus -Werror,
>in a section that is only active for platforms/compilers where we
>know there aren't spurious warnings? That would make detecting
>unintentionally introduced warnings simpler, without the use of
>COPT. Perhaps where the compiler is GCC or CLANG, and the
>platform is x86_64 redhat, something like that?
Strongly against that. I do *not* want Werrror enabled during development. I have a lot of warnings enabled, but while hacking I often have some of them triggering (e.g. an unused variable or static function). Preventing me from compiling in those scenarios has no benefits. Werror it's useful in automated scenarios (e.g. my pre push script compiles with it), a lot less in interactive scenarios where you can just use make -s.
Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-02-17 21:31:57 | Re: pg_recvlogical.c doesn't build with --disable-integer-datetimes |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2017-02-17 21:13:10 | Re: pg_recvlogical.c doesn't build with --disable-integer-datetimes |