Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0
Дата
Msg-id CAM3SWZQ-J15iP7P9KrrPXO_NqgxAyXDgk1DEP4UhoEfeXPvNOA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> The respective macro magic is already in place, its just not used in all
> places. The problem is more that we can't easily use it in all places
> because e.g. in the one case mentioned here the array isn't in the last
> place *in the back branches*.

Are you proposing that we use the FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER macro in every
single place where we currently use the one element array pattern? I
count one place where we currently use FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER. It'd be
pretty ugly to have that everywhere, in my opinion.


-- 
Peter Geoghegan



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0