From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Silencing the remaining clang 15 warnings
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+hUKGJ3ib9tmBfYka1+_=UY55oMYCpKF_ZSQPf6i5B4ph6xng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <514615.1663615243@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+hUKGJ3ib9tmBfYka1+_=UY55oMYCpKF_ZSQPf6i5B4ph6xng@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 20 Sep 2022 10:56:16 +1200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <542989.1663628813.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 19:06:53 -0400
Message-ID: <542990.1663628813@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/542990.1663628813%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 7:20 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> * xlog.c's AdvanceXLInsertBuffer has a local variable "npages"
>> that is only read in the "#ifdef WAL_DEBUG" stanza at the
>> bottom.  Here I've done the rather ugly and brute-force thing
>> of wrapping all the variable's references in "#ifdef WAL_DEBUG".
>> (I tried marking it PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY, but oddly that
>> did not silence the warning.)  I kind of wonder how useful this
>> function's WAL_DEBUG output is --- maybe just dropping that
>> altogether would be better?

> No opinion on the value of the message, but maybe
> pg_attribute_unused() would be better?

I realized that the reason PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY didn't help
is that it expands to empty in an assert-enabled build, which is
what I was testing.  So yeah, using pg_attribute_unused() directly
would probably work better.

(Also, I tried an assert-disabled build and found one additional new
warning; same deal where clang doesn't believe "foo++;" is reason to
consider foo to be used.  That one, PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY can fix.)

			regards, tom lane