| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Add some const decorations to prototypes |
| Date: | 2017-11-10 15:17:52 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.20.1711101612370.668@lancre |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> ISTM That there is still at least one strange cast:
>>
>> +static const char **LWLockTrancheArray = NULL;
>> + LWLockTrancheArray = (const char **) // twice
>
> These are not cases of "cheating". This is just the return value of a
> memory allocation function being cast from void * to the appropriate
> result type. That is an orthogonal style decision that I have
> maintained in these cases.
Ok. I'm at the limit of my C abilities.
Your answer is about void * vs char *, I'm okay with that.
My question was about no const / const in the same operation.
Would it make sense that the function returns "const void *", i.e. the
cast is not on the const part but on the pointer type part?
--
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-11-10 15:29:50 | Re: Add some const decorations to prototypes |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2017-11-10 15:17:15 | Re: PATCH: multivariate histograms and MCV lists |