On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 08:19:59PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:07:08AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Yes, this comment gives no value as it stands. I would be tempted to
>> follow the suggestion to group the whole code block in a single ifdef,
>> including the check, and remove this comment. Like the attached
>> perhaps?
>
> +1
Let me try this one again, as the previous patch would cause a warning
under --without:-zlib as user_compression_defined would be unused. We
could do something like the attached instead. It means doing twice
parse_compress_specification() for the non-zlib path, still we are
already doing so for the zlib path.
If there are other ideas, feel free.
--
Michael
