| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Thomas Munro" <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: const correctness |
| Date: | 2011-11-09 22:47:58 |
| Message-ID: | 21990.1320878878@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> If we're concerned about helping the compiler produce better code,
> I think we should try to make our code safe under strict aliasing
> rules. AFAIK, that generally helps much more than const-correctness.
> (Dunno how feasible that is, though)
The last time we talked about that, we gave up and added
-fno-strict-aliasing, mainly because nobody trusted gcc to warn us about
violations of the aliasing rules. That was quite some time ago though.
Perhaps recent gcc versions do better?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Farina | 2011-11-09 22:53:41 | Re: 9.1.2 ? |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-11-09 22:36:34 | Re: Syntax for partitioning |