Re: ecpg assertion on windows

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2022-08-24 00:18:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But if the regression tests are triggering use of uninitialized values, how
>> could we have failed to detect that? Either valgrind or unstable behavior
>> should have found this ages ago.

> I think it's just different criteria for when to report issues. Valgrind
> reports uninitialized memory only when there's a conditional branch depending
> on it or such. Whereas this seems to trigger when passing an uninitialized
> value to a function by value, even if it's then not relied upon.

If the value is not actually relied on, then it's a false positive.

I don't say we shouldn't fix it, because we routinely jump through
hoops to silence various sorts of functionally-harmless warnings.
But let's be clear about whether there's a real bug here.

regards, tom lane