On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Perhaps something like
Yeah, that'd work. You'd want a big ol' warning comment here:
> typedef struct NumericData
> {
> int32 vl_len_;/* varlena header (do not
> touch directly!) */
> NumericBase dat
Hi,
On 2023-02-06 11:55:40 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I am, however, very dubious that Andres is correct that there's a
> problem here. Given that two of the variants of union NumericChoice
> are structs ending with a flexible array, any compiler that thinks
> it knows the size of the union precise
Hi
On 2023-02-06 11:42:57 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 5, 2023 at 6:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On the other hand, it also just seems risky from a code writing
> > perspective. It's not immediate obvious that it'd be unsafe to create an
> > on-stack Numeric by assigning *ptr. But
Robert Haas writes:
> I do not really know exactly how to do that, though. Our usual pattern
> is to just have a struct and end with a variable-length array, or
> alternatively add a comment says "other stuff follows!" at the end of
> the struct definition, without doing anything that C knows abou
On Sun, Feb 5, 2023 at 6:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On the other hand, it also just seems risky from a code writing perspective.
> It's not immediate obvious that it'd be unsafe to create an on-stack Numeric
> by assigning *ptr. But it is.
Well, I think that is pretty obvious: we have lots of
Hi,
On 2023-02-05 10:18:14 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 05:07:08AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > : In function 'assign':
> > :9:6: warning: array subscript 'foo[0]' is partly outside array
> > bounds of 'unsigned char[4]' [-Warray-bounds=]
> > 9 | p->i = i;
>
Hi,
On February 5, 2023 6:16:55 AM GMT+01:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>Michael Paquier writes:
>> On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 05:07:08AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> We actually have a fair amount of code like that, but currently are
>>> escaping most of the warnings, because gcc doesn't know that pallo
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 05:07:08AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> We actually have a fair amount of code like that, but currently are
>> escaping most of the warnings, because gcc doesn't know that palloc() is
>> an allocator. With more optimizations (particularly with LT
On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 05:07:08AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> : In function 'assign':
> :9:6: warning: array subscript 'foo[0]' is partly outside array
> bounds of 'unsigned char[4]' [-Warray-bounds=]
> 9 | p->i = i;
> | ^~
> :8:22: note: object of size 4 allocated by '__buil
