Re: LLVM breakage on seawasp
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: LLVM breakage on seawasp |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8051E08B-5D40-4DF7-8E86-CD17B6510227@anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: LLVM breakage on seawasp (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: LLVM breakage on seawasp
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On August 24, 2019 2:37:55 PM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: >> On August 24, 2019 1:57:56 PM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> >wrote: >>> So we're depending on APIs that upstream doesn't think are stable? > >> Seawasp iirc builds against the development branch of llvm, which >explains why we see failures there. Does that address what you are >concerned about? If not, could you expand? > >I know it's the development branch. The question is whether this >breakage is something *they* ought to be fixing. If not, I'm >worried that we're too much in bed with implementation details >of LLVM that we shouldn't be depending on. Don't think so - it's a C++ standard feature in the version of the standard LLVM is based on. So it's pretty reasonable forthem to drop their older backwards compatible function. Access -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: