Re: Change copyObject() to use typeof_unqual

From: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Change copyObject() to use typeof_unqual
Date: 2026-03-16 13:40:52
Message-ID: CAGECzQSH-jdkmW-amVzxynPuOScZQ9CMje1BgErPzA7ooBU77w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 16 Mar 2026 at 13:47, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
> I'm tempted to go with my proposed patch of a version-based override for
> the time being.

Sounds good to me. But let's not forget to swap back the order of
detection for typeof_unqual vs __typeof_unqual__. Afaict that's not
needed anymore and the comment there only becomes confusing with this
new fix.

Also, it might be nice to only do your version based override, if
we're actually compiling bitcode. In my patch I used
-DPG_COMPILING_BITCODE for that. Otherwise this override can also
happen for regular compiles using clang, which I think would be a bit
confusing.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Álvaro Herrera 2026-03-16 13:42:09 Re: some more include removal from headers
Previous Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2026-03-16 13:31:12 Re: Exit walsender before confirming remote flush in logical replication