Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] quiet conversion warning in DatumGetFloat4
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] quiet conversion warning in DatumGetFloat4 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22297.1496244978@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] quiet conversion warning in DatumGetFloat4 (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] quiet conversion warning in DatumGetFloat4
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net> writes: > On 05/31/17 01:26, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hm. I think it would be better to use DatumGetInt32 here. Arguably, >> direct use of GET_4_BYTES and its siblings should only appear in >> DatumGetFoo macros. > Like so? These are the 4 sites where {GET,SET}_n_BYTES got introduced > in 14cca1b (for consistency, though only the GET_4 case produces warnings). After experimenting with -Wconversion, I see why we don't use it in server builds --- it produces an astonishing number of mostly-useless warnings, which apparently can only be silenced by introducing explicit casts. I do not think that cluttering our code with lots more explicit casts would be a win for either readability or safety. However, I grant your point that some extensions may have outside constraints that mandate using -Wconversion, so to the extent that we can keep key headers like postgres.h from triggering those warnings, it's probably worth doing. I suspect you're still seeing a lot of them though --- experiments with some contrib modules suggest that a lot of our other headers also contain code that would trigger them. I do not think I'd be on board with trying to silence them generally. However, the present patch seems harmless enough, and arguably a tad cleaner than what we had, so pushed. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: