Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Not sure I understand.
>> The header had:
>> isort(int4 *a, const int len)
>> and the code had
>> isort(int4 *a, int len)
> Oh, I see.  Yeah, that's inconsistent, though my thought would be to
> remove the (rather useless) const decoration in the header.  I believe
> this coding is actually legal per C99, though, precisely because the
> version in the header is only decoration --- callers of the function
> do not care whether it thinks the parameter value is immutable inside
> itself.  The one at the function definition site is what counts ...

If it wasn't legal, it should be an error and not a warning. I would
guess it's a warning simply so you should be aware that it's ignored.
I'll update the patch for it.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to