Re: Questions about warnings

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Questions about warnings
Date: 2007-01-25 12:38:14
Message-ID: 200701251338.15280.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I'm looking over the VC build trying to eliminate what warnings are
> left. One thing that appears in a couple of places is stuff like:
>
> .\src\bin\psql\print.c(2014): warning C4090: 'function' : different
> 'const' qualifiers
>
> This happens in psql when we do free() on a variable that's "const
> char **". The same thing happens in oracle_compat.c in the backend
> with pfree().

The code in question is:

const char **headers;

[...]

free(headers);

> Is this a warning we should care about and remove (or change?) the
> const qualifyer? Or should I just ignore it?

My free() takes a pointer to void, which should be able to point to any
type of data, and certainly pointer to pointer to const char fits that
description. So I think the compiler is overly zealous.

Actually writing into the supposedly constant data pointed to by
a "const type *" pointer would be a potential bug, but GCC catches
that, so we can be reasonably assured that this is OK in the current
code.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-01-25 13:11:15 Re: Questions about warnings
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-01-25 12:23:57 ECPG buglet?