On 2020-Jan-09, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > In modern times, we define pg_attribute_noreturn() like this: > > > /* GCC, Sunpro and XLC support aligned, packed and noreturn */ > > #if defined(__GNUC__) || defined(__SUNPRO_C) || defined(__IBMC__) > > #define pg_attribute_noreturn() __attribute__((noreturn)) > > #define HAVE_PG_ATTRIBUTE_NORETURN 1 > > #else > > #define pg_attribute_noreturn() > > #endif > > > I suppose this will cause warnings in compilers other than those, but > > I'm not sure if we care. What about MSVC for example? > > Yeah, the lack of coverage for MSVC seems like the main reason not > to assume this works "everywhere of interest".
That would easy to add as __declspec(noreturn) ... except that in MSVC the decoration goes *before* the prototype rather after it, so this seems difficult to achieve without invasive surgery. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/cpp/noreturn?view=vs-2015 > > With the attached patch, everything compiles cleanly in my setup, no > > warnings, but then it's GCC. > > Meh ... I'm not really convinced that any of those changes are > improvements. Particularly not the removals of switch-case breaks. However, we already have a large number of proc_exit() calls in switch blocks that are not followed by breaks. In fact, the majority are already like that. I can easily leave this well enough alone, though. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
