On 2013-12-11 12:37:56 +0100, Florian Pflug wrote: > On Dec11, 2013, at 11:47 , Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 2013-12-11 11:42:25 +0100, Florian Pflug wrote: > > Yes (although there's C11 stuff to do equivalent stuff afair) - I was > > thinking of only doing it for compilers we support that dark magic for > > and fall back to returning a void* for the others. We'll probably miss a > > cast or two required on !gcc that way, but it's still likely to be less > > error prone. > > > Would it? For this to catch type mismatches, you'd both need to develop > on a typeof-supporting compiler *and* don't cast the result of > relptr_access(). > But you can't really do that, because the code will then fail on compilers > which don't support typeof()...
Yea, right. > What we could do, I guess, is to pass the type to relptr_access() and to > relptr(), and let the compiler verify that they are the same. Tom and I actually added a macro that's helpful for that recently: AssertVariableIsOfType(). With that we should be able to get something reasonable, failing at compile time, with a useful error message even ;) Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
