On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Tom Lane wrote:

> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > *) why the large difference in the build-flags ?
> CVS HEAD configure.in knows about icc and the release branches don't.
> I think the changes were only put into HEAD because of lack of testing,
> but if we have buildfarm coverage I think it'd be OK to back-port the
> configure logic to the prior branches.

Plus if it is backported, I can enable 8.x builds on mongoose (my x86 icc
buildfarm box).

One reason I like to use icc is that I have found (at least in c++ code)
that it had a tendancy to warn me about portability issues more than gcc
did.  But this was nasty, convoluted, nested-template c++ code where it is
much more likely to wander into situations in code that the standard did
not define, and compilers had vastly different interpretations, and
tracking down these sorts of errors was a matter of trying to glean what
exactly the new compiler didn't like from a compiler error which wrapped
around the screen at least 3 times.  Intel's compiler was one of the most
standards-compliant c++ compilers around, which was good about pointing
out things that were not strictly compliant, while still accepting the
more obscure tricks that the standard did allow.  Ah, the good old days ;)

>                       regards, tom lane
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Neglect of duty does not cease, by repetition, to be neglect of duty.
                -- Napoleon

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to