Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:05:45AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> pgace.h: you have a bunch of "static inline" functions in here. As far >> as I know this doesn't work in compilers other than GCC :-( See >> pg_list.h (list_head) for an example. I think we can tolerate this for >> the three functions in pg_list.h because they are so few and so tiny, >> but I'm not sure about PGACE because they are a large lot. On the other >> hand, turning them to real functions would be a performance hit. > > Really? C99 requires it and MSVC does support it. At least the other > compilers whose name I remembered (HP, Sun) support it also. I'd be > surprised if a compiler didn't since it's the form of inline that most > matches what people expect to happen. > > Do you have an example?
I have no preference either of them, because it is not an essence of my patches whether its security hooks are implemented as inline, or not. IIRC, indeed, some of compiler also supported "static inline". However, it also seems to me that PostgreSQL implementation tend to avoid to use inline functions actively. For example, heap_getattr() and fastgetattr() are implemented as macros, even if they have a bit complex conditional branches, which can be rewritten more simple with inline functions. If we have any policy to use inline functions, I'll follow this. Thanks, > http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2003/03/inline.html > http://hi.baidu.com/junru/blog/item/4d8db11339050c856438db7a.html > > Have a nice day, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
