Kris Jurka wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Great, fix attached and applied.
> >
>
> You also need to change lines 48 and 64 of heapam.h to use the same
> coding.
Done.
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Great, fix attached and applied.
You also need to change lines 48 and 64 of heapam.h to use the same
coding.
Kris Jurka
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map
Kris Jurka wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>
> > Perhaps someone could check if changing the test explicitly check
> > against NULL:
> >
> >> ((attnum) > (int) (tup)->t_data->t_natts) ? \
> >> ( \
> >> (((isnull) != NULL)? (
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 05:39:30PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yes, this coding removes the warning.
>
> Oh, good, that seems like a reasonable change to make (it's arguably
> more clear than the original anyway).
>
> Is this the only place where the warning shows up? ISTM there's quite
> a lot o
Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>> Perhaps someone could check if changing the test explicitly check
>> against NULL:
>>
>> ((attnum) > (int) (tup)->t_data->t_natts) ? \
>> ( \
>> (((isnull) != NULL)? (*(isnull) = true) : (dummyret)NULL),
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Perhaps someone could check if changing the test explicitly check
against NULL:
((attnum) > (int) (tup)->t_data->t_natts) ? \
( \
(((isnull) != NULL)? (*(isnull) = true) : (dummyret)NULL), \
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 01:16:04PM -0500, Kris Jurka wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Gevik Babakhani wrote:
>
> >I noticed the following compile warnings. Perhaps someone is interested
> >to know about them.
>
> Also I was testing a gcc 4.2 snapshot (20060419) and it has a whole lot of
> war
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Also I was testing a gcc 4.2 snapshot (20060419) and it has a whole lot of
> > warnings stemming from heap_getattr's isnull check:
> > aclchk.c:791: warning: the address of 'isNull', will always evaluate as
> > 'true'
>
> We need to lo
Gevik Babakhani wrote:
> I noticed the following compile warnings. Perhaps someone is interested
> to know about them.
>
> /usr/bin/flex -o'pgc.c' pgc.l
> gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
> -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g
> -Wno-erro
Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also I was testing a gcc 4.2 snapshot (20060419) and it has a whole lot of
> warnings stemming from heap_getattr's isnull check:
> aclchk.c:791: warning: the address of 'isNull', will always evaluate as
> 'true'
We need to lobby the gcc maintainers to not
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Gevik Babakhani wrote:
I noticed the following compile warnings. Perhaps someone is interested
to know about them.
Also I was testing a gcc 4.2 snapshot (20060419) and it has a whole lot of
warnings stemming from heap_getattr's isnull check:
aclchk.c:791: warning: the
I noticed the following compile warnings. Perhaps someone is interested
to know about them.
/usr/bin/flex -o'pgc.c' pgc.l
gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -g
-Wno-error -I./../include -I. -I../../../../s
12 matches
Mail list logo
