I suggest you test for the Intel compiler, and if it is there, make the
static variable "volatile", and add a comment about why that is being
done.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sergey E. Koposov wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Teodor Sigaev wrote:
> >>> What does that option do? Is it practical to enable it for the entire
> >>> backend?
> >> From docs:
> >> Disables inline expansion of standard library or intrinsic functions.
> >>
> >>> And isn't this a straightforward compiler bug they should be notified
> >>> about?
> >> What's a choice? Now I see 3:
> >> 1) -O1
> >> 2) "volatile"
> >> 3) -nolib_inline
> >>
> >> IMHO, only -O1 is guarantee for other possible places... But I'm not familiar
> >> enough with such kinds of bugs.
> >
> > My guess is that the compiler writers saw you calling a libc function,
> > and assumed that library could not modify the file static variable,
> > forgetting that the libc function can call back into the original file.
> >
> > Can you detect the Itanium compiler and optimization levels via
> > preprocessor symbols, and test for that, and throw an #error?
>
> No, it's impossible.
> Unfortunately the __OPTIMIZE__ preproc. symbol of icc doesn't allow to
> distinguish between different optimization levels. (only between -O0 and
> anything else).
>
> Regards,
> Sergey
>
> *******************************************************************
> Sergey E. Koposov
> Max Planck Institute for Astronomy/Sternberg Astronomical Institute
> Tel: +49-6221-528-349
> Web: http://lnfm1.sai.msu.ru/~math
> E-mail: math@sai.msu.ru
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
-- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
