Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZQ-J15iP7P9KrrPXO_NqgxAyXDgk1DEP4UhoEfeXPvNOA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0
Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> The respective macro magic is already in place, its just not used in all
> places. The problem is more that we can't easily use it in all places
> because e.g. in the one case mentioned here the array isn't in the last
> place *in the back branches*.

Are you proposing that we use the FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER macro in every
single place where we currently use the one element array pattern? I
count one place where we currently use FLEXIBLE_ARRAY_MEMBER. It'd be
pretty ugly to have that everywhere, in my opinion.


-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Back branches vs. gcc 4.8.0