Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2013-07-29 08:02:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we turn off the optimization, that will fix any other cases as well,
>> no? So why would we risk breaking third-party code by back-porting the
>> struct declaration changes?
> The -fno-agressive-loop thingie afaics only controls the optimization
> with regard to loopey constructs, not in general. I *think* there are
> independent hazards with general unreachability detection. Not sure
> whether they trigger at -O2 or only at -O3 though.
I'm not excited about breaking code in order to fix optimization bugs
that are purely hypothetical (and for which there's no particular reason
to believe that the proposed change would fix them anyway). If we were
seeing such things in the field it would be a different story.
regards, tom lane
