Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 7:35 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Discounting the Windows animals, it looks like the xlc animals are
>> our only remaining ones that use anything except gcc or clang.
> After some research I determined that the release date for xlc 12.1
> seems to be June 1, 2012. At that time, clang 3.1 was current and just
> after, GCC release version 4.7.1 was released. The oldest version of
> clang that I find in the buildfarm is 3.9, and the oldest version of
> gcc I find in the buildfarm is 4.6.3. So, somewhat to my surprise, xlc
> is not the oldest compiler that we're still supporting in the
> buildfarm. But it is very old, and it seems like that gcc and clang
> are going to continue to gain ground against gcc and other proprietary
> compilers for some time to come.
Probably. Independent of that, it's fair to ask why we're still
testing against xlc 12.1 and not the considerably-more-recent xlclang,
or at least xlc 16.1. (I also wonder why we're still testing AIX 7.1
rather than an OS version that's not EOL.)
> What does concern me is finding and coding
> around compiler bugs. 19fa977311b9da9c6c84f0108600e78213751a38 is just
> ridiculous, IMHO.
I would agree, except for the downthread discovery that the bug is
still present in current xlc and xlclang. Short of blowing off AIX
altogether, it seems like we need to do something about it.
regards, tom lane