Re: unconstify equivalent for volatile
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2019-03-19T10:52:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v2-0001-Initialize-structure-at-declaration.patch (text/plain) patch v2-0001
- v2-0002-Add-macro-to-cast-away-volatile-without-allowing-.patch (text/plain) patch v2-0002
On 2019-02-18 16:42, Andres Freund wrote: > On February 18, 2019 7:39:25 AM PST, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> I propose to add an equivalent to unconstify() for volatile. When >> working on this, I picked the name unvolatize() mostly as a joke, but >> it >> appears it's a real word. Other ideas? > > Shouldn't we just remove just about all those use of volatile? Basically the only valid use these days is on sigsetjmp call sites. So, after some recent cleanups and another one attached here, we're now down to 1.5 uses of this. (0.5 because the hunk in pmsignal.c doesn't have a cast right now, but it would need one if s/MemSet/memset/.) Those seem legitimate. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Commits
-
Add macro to cast away volatile without allowing changes to underlying type
- 481018f28040 12.0 landed
-
Initialize structure at declaration
- 572e3e6634e5 12.0 landed