Re: [HACKERS] Regression tests on intel for 6.5.2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Regression tests on intel for 6.5.2
Date
Msg-id 13733.938697904@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Regression tests on intel for 6.5.2  (Christof Petig <christof.petig@wtal.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Christof Petig <christof.petig@wtal.de> writes:
> Perhaps (strange thoughts come in to my mind ...) the compiler
> optimizes the function call into a machine instruction ...
> /tmp> cc -O2 -o test test.c -lm
> /tmp> ./test
> !finite

> Looks like this is the case.

Bingo!  I think you've got it.

> I would propose another autoconf test. (I could easily do it.)

Yes, we should not be assuming that finite() is a macro, which is what
that #ifdef coding does.  We need a HAVE_FINITE configuration test.
If you have time to prepare the diffs it'd be great.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Gilbert
Date:
Subject: ...
Next
From: "Ansley, Michael"
Date:
Subject: RE: