Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: > On 2023-11-06 Mo 09:57, Tom Lane wrote: >> +1 for the concept --- I was just noticing yesterday that my buildfarm >> warning scraping script is turning up some of these. However, we ought >> to try to minimize the amount of our own code that is subject to the >> pragma. So I think a prerequisite ought to be to get this out of >> plpython.h: >> >> /* >> * Used throughout, so it's easier to just include it everywhere. >> */ >> #include "plpy_util.h" >> >> Alternatively, is there a way to reverse the effect of the >> pragma after we've included what we need?
> There's "GCC diagnostic push" and "GCC diagnostic pop" but I don't know > if they apply to "GCC system_header". Instead of using "GCC > system_header" we could just ignore the warnings we're seeing. e.g. "GCC > diagnostic ignored \"-Wdeclaration-after-statement\"" Probably a better way is to invent a separate header "plpython_system.h" that just includes the Python headers, to scope the pragma precisely. (I guess it could have the fixup #defines we're wrapping those headers in, too.) The same idea would work in plperl. regards, tom lane