On Friday, June 22, 2012 02:04:02 AM Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > All of the less popular compilers we support we support precisely > > because they pretend to be GCC, with the sole exception, as always, of > > the Microsoft product, in this case MSVC. > > This is nonsense. There are at least three buildfarm machines running > compilers that do not "pretend to be gcc" (at least, configure > recognizes them as not gcc) and are not MSVC either. We ought to have > more IMO, because software monocultures are dangerous. Of those three, > two pass the "quiet inline" test and one --- the newest of the three > if I guess correctly --- does not. So it is not the case that > !USE_INLINE is dead code, even if you adopt the position that we don't > care about any compiler not represented in the buildfarm. I think you can make hpux's acc do the right thing with some trickery though. I don't have access to hpux anymore though so I can't test it.
Should there be no other trick - I think there is though - we could just specify -W2177 as an alternative parameter to test in the 'quiet static inline' test. I definitely do not want to bar any sensible compiler from compiling postgres but the keyword here is 'sensible'. If it requires some modest force/trickery to behave sensible, thats ok, but if we need to ship around huge unreadable crufty macros just to support them I don't find it ok. Andres -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
