Re: unconstify()/unvolatize() vs g++/clang++
| От | Peter Eisentraut |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: unconstify()/unvolatize() vs g++/clang++ |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 47f623a0-8d66-48cd-8dd4-58e3db603a02@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | unconstify()/unvolatize() vs g++/clang++ (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: unconstify()/unvolatize() vs g++/clang++
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11.12.23 01:42, Thomas Munro wrote: > AFAICS you can't use unconstify()/unvolatize() in a static inline > function in a .h file, or in a .cpp file, because > __builtin_types_compatible_p is only available in C, not C++. Seems > like a reasonable thing to want to be able to do, no? I'm not > immediately sure what the right fix is; would #if > defined(HAVE__BUILTIN_TYPES_COMPATIBLE_P) && !defined(__cplusplus) > around the relevant versions of constify()/unvolatize() be too easy? That seems right to me. If you are slightly more daring, you can write an alternative definition in C++ using const_cast?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: