Re: strict aliasing (was: const correctness)
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, "Thomas Munro" <munro@ip9.org>, "Florian Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org>
Date: 2011-11-14T23:33:13Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Monday, November 14, 2011 10:22:52 PM Tom Lane wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes: > >> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >>> Dunno ... where were the warnings exactly? > > > > From HEAD checkout of a few minutes ago I now see only 9: > Hmm ... well, none of those look likely to be in performance-sensitive > areas. But I wonder just how good the trouble-detection code is these > days. No idea about how good it is but you can make the detection code more aggressive by -Wstrict-aliasing=1 (which will produce more false positives). I don't gcc will ever be able to call all possible misusages. E.g. The List api is a case where its basically impossible to catch everything (as gcc won't be able to figure out what the ListCell.data.ptr_value pointed to originally in the general case). Andres