Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch - Mailing list pgsql-committers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch
Date
Msg-id 13208.1099319961@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
List pgsql-committers
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Regarding __builtin_constant_p(), it is obviously the case that we need
> to ensure the code compiles on a wide variety of C compilers. But I
> don't see the harm in using GCC-specific features where (a) they can be
> easily #ifdef'd away when not using GCC (b) they have a very limited
> impact -- i.e. they do not result in using a lot of #ifdefs, or
> significantly changing the behavior of the code.

No argument on either of those --- just on the conclusion that we can
optimize on the assumption that that optimization will happen.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-committers by date:

Previous
From: momjian@svr1.postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian)
Date:
Subject: pgsql: Update comment to point to proper file.
Next
From: momjian@svr1.postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian)
Date:
Subject: pgsql: That's just the lovely way windows handles a "segfault".