Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 15:02:27 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>,
	Hans Buschmann <buschmann@nidsa.net>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>,
	"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: AW: PG19beta1: GCC 16.1.1 =?utf-8?Q?wa?=
 =?utf-8?B?cm5pbmc6IOKAmGFjdHVhbF9hcmdfdHlwZXM=?= =?utf-8?B?4oCZ?= may be
 used uninitialized in clauses.c
Message-ID: <arWB0_xSn4E3qpfq@nathan>
References: <ajQXL6rEkHottp3q@nathan>
 <ajQXxk0eohQ8BNe9@alvherre.pgsql>
 <ajQdMUJTOGhoNV8x@nathan>
 <1812498.1790279465@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1812498.1790279465@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/arWB0_xSn4E3qpfq%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 03:51:05PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Presumably this could be silenced in the same way as in f04781df5.
> I haven't troubled so far because I don't see any other BF animals
> producing the same warning, but perhaps we should silence this one
> too?

Seems reasonable to me.

-- 
nathan