Re: Unexpected interval comparison - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Vick Khera
Subject Re: Unexpected interval comparison
Date
Msg-id CALd+dcfv1Dcoydy+q6iU30J+v3uYnjE0w+8KYRepV-e8bf+_wA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Unexpected interval comparison  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 4:15 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
The previous expression intended to avoid decimal arithmetic, but
gcc optimizes the simple division better (using cmovns-add-sar)
than the current INT64_AU32 (jmp-sar) so I changed it. This
doesn't suffer overflow.


How does this affect non-gcc compilers? Specifically I am interested in the llvm based compilers in FreeBSD. Or is this within a gcc-specific section of the header?

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Kellerer
Date:
Subject: Re: browser interface to forums please?
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: browser interface to forums please?