Hi,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-01-29 10:28:18 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> OK. How about this: are you open to changes that move us in the
>> direction of extensibility later? (By this I do *not* mean imposing a
>> bunch of requirements on you... either small changes to your patches
>> or something part of another commit.)
>
> I'm good with that.
>
>
>> Or are you determined that this always should be a part of core?
> I'm strongly against there not being an in-core JIT. I'm not at all
> against adding APIs that allow to do different JIT implementations out
> of core.
I can live with that.
I recommend that you discuss with packagers and a few others, to
reduce the chance of disagreement later.
> Well, the source would require an actual compiler around. And the
> inlining *just* for the function code itself isn't actually that
> interesting, you e.g. want to also be able to
I think you hit enter too quicly... what's the rest of that sentence?
Regards,
Jeff Davis