Subject: Re: warnings for invalid function casts
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <1e97628e-6447-b4fd-e230-d109cec2d584@2ndquadrant.com>
 <474790.1593526505@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20200630192135.nwlza2u57dy3qej4@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <496552.1593545900@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <c764383a-3f9e-f5ba-79d1-8824fe73340f@2ndquadrant.com>
 <931660.1593787200@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <d04f3b48-8195-aa83-8862-b6d3747fed30@2ndquadrant.com>
 <1183184.1593872167@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <2410175f-255d-ab5c-e95e-2dfc1bad3f97@2ndquadrant.com>
 <1527436.1594138095@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Organization: 2ndQuadrant
Message-ID: <b49de4e4-458d-2be6-5905-feee41e74ee1@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 20:58:28 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1527436.1594138095@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2020-07-07 18:08, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> On 2020-07-04 16:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm for a typedef.  There is *nothing* readable about "(void (*) (void))",
>>> and the fact that it's theoretically incorrect for the purpose doesn't
>>> exactly aid intelligibility either.  With a typedef, not only are
>>> the uses more readable but there's a place to put a comment explaining
>>> that this is notionally wrong but it's what gcc specifies to use
>>> to suppress thus-and-such warnings.
> 
>> Makes sense.  New patch here.
> 
> I don't have a compiler handy that emits these warnings, but this
> passes an eyeball check.

committed

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services