| From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Use pg_icu_unicode_version(void) instead of pg_icu_unicode_version() |
| Date: | 2026-03-09 07:57:30 |
| Message-ID: | aa59aqbZFLVNI4hZ@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 07:36:20PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 27.02.26 07:45, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 02:04:30PM +0800, Chao Li wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > What I'm interested in is the broader policy: when reviewing patches,
> > > if we encounter a foo() declaration, should we consistently request a change to foo(void)?
> > > If yes, the standard should be documented somewhere.
> >
> > I think that they should be consistently fixed for the reasons mentioned in
> > [1], and that the best way to achieve this goal would be to enable -Wstrict-prototypes
> > by default ([2]).
>
> Yes, why not add -Wstrict-prototypes and perhaps -Wold-style-definition to
> the standard warnings. Then we don't have to keep chasing these manually.
Yeah, I'll look at adding those.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nazir Bilal Yavuz | 2026-03-09 08:10:13 | Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD |
| Previous Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2026-03-09 07:55:12 | RE: Idea to enhance pgbench by more modes to generate data (multi-TXNs, UNNEST, COPY BINARY) |