Thread
Commits
-
Fix compiler warning in back branches (9.6, 10).
- 618d139f82d4 9.6.22 landed
- 26812bcaa664 10.17 landed
-
Fix assorted compiler warnings seen in the buildfarm.
- fbb2e9a030ee 11.0 cited
-
GCC warning in back branches
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> — 2021-02-15T01:15:51Z
Hi, guc.c: In function ‘RestoreGUCState’: guc.c:9455:4: error: ‘varsourceline’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] 9455 | set_config_sourcefile(varname, varsourcefile, varsourceline); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I propose the attached. -
Re: GCC warning in back branches
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2021-02-15T01:34:58Z
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:15:51PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > guc.c: In function ‘RestoreGUCState’: > guc.c:9455:4: error: ‘varsourceline’ may be used uninitialized in this > function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > 9455 | set_config_sourcefile(varname, varsourcefile, varsourceline); > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > I propose the attached. We usually don't bother much about compilation warnings in stable branches as long as they are not real bugs, and these are the oldest stable ones. So why here? I would have patched the top of the function if it were me, btw. -- Michael
-
Re: GCC warning in back branches
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-02-15T01:41:25Z
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:15:51PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: >> I propose the attached. > We usually don't bother much about compilation warnings in stable > branches as long as they are not real bugs, and these are the oldest > stable ones. So why here? I would have patched the top of the > function if it were me, btw. If somebody were running a buildfarm member with recent gcc and -Werror, we'd pretty much have to fix it. I'd say the real policy is that we don't worry about uninitialized-variable warnings from old compiler versions, on the theory that they're probably compiler shortcomings. But I'd be inclined to fix anything from a current gcc version. regards, tom lane
-
Re: GCC warning in back branches
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> — 2021-02-15T04:59:52Z
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 2:35 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > ... I would have patched the top of the > function if it were me, btw. I just copied the way it is coded in master (due to commit fbb2e9a0 which fixed this warning in 11+).