From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PG versus libxml2 2.12.x
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:19:47 -0500
Message-ID: <1784723.1706541587@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a9e2f184-6267-4f74-9922-9211d78f6f9a@eisentraut.org>
References: <1389505.1706382262@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<a9e2f184-6267-4f74-9922-9211d78f6f9a@eisentraut.org>
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
> On 27.01.24 20:04, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't mind adopting the "const" --- it's a good idea in isolation.
>> The trouble is in fixing our code to work with both old and new
>> libxml2 versions. We could thrash around with a configure test or
>> something, but I think the most expedient answer is just to insert
>> some explicit casts, as shown in the attached. It's possible though
>> that some compilers will throw a cast-away-const warning. I'm
>> not seeing any, but ...
> In PL/Tcl, we used to have these CONST84 and CONST86 things, for similar
> reasons. Maybe that would be another approach.
Yeah, if the simple cast approach turns out to create warnings,
we'll have to fall back on using actually different declarations.
I'm hoping to not have to go there.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, peter@eisentraut.org, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PG versus libxml2 2.12.x
In-Reply-To: <1784723.1706541587@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox