Andres Freund <> writes:
>> I personally find per-function annotation ala
>> __attribute__((optimize("no-crossjumping")))
>> cleaner anyway.  I tested that, and it seems to work.
>> Obviously we'd have to hide that behind a configure test.  Could also do
>> tests based on __GNUC__ / __GNUC_MINOR__, but that seems uglier.


> Checking for this isn't entirely pretty - see my attached attempt at
> doing so.  I considered hiding
> __attribute__((optimize("no-crossjumping"))) in execInterpExpr.c behind
> a macro (like PG_DISABLE_CROSSJUMPING), but I don't really think that
> makes things better.

I think it would, primarily because if we find out that some other compiler
spells this differently, we could handle it totally within configure.

Isn't our practice to put __attribute__ at the end of a function
declaration or definition, not in the middle someplace?

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to