Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 2014-05-17 19:15:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> ... It appears to me that >> the compiler is within its rights to refuse a nonconstant expression >> for an inner initializer according to C89, though I don't see any such >> restriction in C99.
> Yea, I've complained about it in > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140403152834.gg17...@awork2.anarazel.de Ah. I'd sort of ignored that patch because it didn't seem too relevant to the issues we were discussing at the time. > That piece code is also confused about using static vs. const. For a lot > longer though... Well, "static" is also a good thing here because it eliminates the need for runtime initialization of a function-local array variable. But yeah, the code is way under-const-ified as well. > I'd just duplicated the ddl structs. Seemed to be the least ugly thing I > could come up with. For from pretty tho. It works, anyway. If I don't think of something better, I'll do a bit more polishing and commit that tomorrow. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
