On fre, 2010-06-25 at 15:49 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> For the record, here is a patch that would address these issues.
>
> At the moment, I'm waiting to get my hands on the new version 2.7 of
> clang to see if some of these issues have gone away.
>
> Considering that clang already helped us find one bug in the code, I
> think it's worth trying to make this work.
So, clang 2.7 didn't fix it. Do we want to proceed with my patch or
leave clang unsupported?