Re: warnings for invalid function casts

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: warnings for invalid function casts
Date: 2020-07-14 18:58:28
Message-ID: b49de4e4-458d-2be6-5905-feee41e74ee1@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-07-07 18:08, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 2020-07-04 16:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm for a typedef. There is *nothing* readable about "(void (*) (void))",
>>> and the fact that it's theoretically incorrect for the purpose doesn't
>>> exactly aid intelligibility either. With a typedef, not only are
>>> the uses more readable but there's a place to put a comment explaining
>>> that this is notionally wrong but it's what gcc specifies to use
>>> to suppress thus-and-such warnings.
>
>> Makes sense. New patch here.
>
> I don't have a compiler handy that emits these warnings, but this
> passes an eyeball check.

committed

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2020-07-14 19:18:01 Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-07-14 18:55:23 Re: INSERT INTO SELECT, Why Parallelism is not selected?