Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Stefan mentioned that the warning may be one that shows up in a different
>> compiler somewhere as well, thouh, which might indicate that we should fix
>> the underlying issue? (Even if the code is correct, if it confuses multiple
>> compilers...)
> I think the right fix is just to remove the const qualifier. It's clearly not
> treating the pointer as const if it's passing it to pfree which is surely a
> state change if anything is.
That was what you claimed in the previous discussion, but you were wrong
then and you're still wrong. The pointer is "const char **" which means
it is a pointer to some pointers that are not themselves constant. That
is, the palloc'd area *contains* pointers to const strings, but that
doesn't make the palloc'd area itself const. You're making the same
mistake msvc does.
I agree though that the #pragma solution is awfully ugly. What I'd
be inclined to do is
/* cast away indirect const to avoid warnings from broken compilers */
free((void *) headers);
...
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
