Re: cpluspluscheck complains about use of register
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
From: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2022-03-09T10:08:57Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Remove uses of register due to incompatibility with C++17 and up
- 03bf971d2dc7 16.0 landed
>>> It seems we should just remove the use of register?
>>
>> I have a vague idea that it was once important to say "register" if
>> you are going to use the variable in an asm snippet that requires it
>> to be in a register. That might be wrong, or it might be obsolete
>> even if once true. We could try taking these out and seeing if the
>> buildfarm complains.
>
> We have several inline asm statements not using register despite using
> variables in a register (e.g. pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl()), so I
> wouldn't expect a problem with compilers we support.
>
> Should we make configure test for -Wregister? There's at least one additional
> use of register that we'd have to change (pg_regexec).
From a compilation perspective, "register" tells the compiler that you
cannot have a pointer on a variable, i.e. it generates an error if someone
adds something like:
void * p = ®ister_variable;
Removing the "register" declaration means that such protection would be
removed, and creating such a pointer could reduce drastically compiler
optimization opportunities.
--
Fabien.