Tom, would you be willing to isolate these operations into functions
that could be marked with a "no_overflow_check" attribute? This would
be easy for us to deal with, would survive preprocesing cleanly, and
wouldn't have any performance cost since inliners do a fine job.
John
On 8/3/2010 3:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
John Regehr<reg...@cs.utah.edu> writes:
Just to follow up: all the other ones seem to be non-problems.
Would you folks be willing to specify which arithmetic operations are
considered to be safe in the case of overflow? Something simple like an
"INTEGER_OVERFLOW_OK" comment at the end of the line of code containing
the operation would suffice. This would let me automatically filter out
error messages on these lines of code in the future.
That might be doable for individual operations, but I don't think that
(for example) having to label all the users of RIGHTMOST_ONE() would be
very maintainable. Is your code capable of tracking back to a macro
definition?
Also, it would be nicer if we could put the marker comment on an
adjacent line. If it has to be on the same line then there are
formatting problems when the code is wide (and pgindent could break it).
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
