Re: consider -Wmissing-variable-declarations

2024-06-18 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, +many for doing this in principle > -const char *EAN13_range[][2] = { > +static const char *EAN13_range[][2] = { > {"000", "019"}, /* GS1 US */ > {"020", "029"}, /* Restricted distribution (MO > defined) */ > {"030", "039"},

Re: consider -Wmissing-variable-declarations

2024-06-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Here is an updated patch set. I have implemented proper solutions for the various hacks in the previous patch set. So this patch set should now be ready for proper consideration. The way I have organized it here is that patches 0002 through 0008 should be improvements in their own right.

Re: consider -Wmissing-variable-declarations

2024-05-14 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 10.05.24 11:53, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: On 09/05/2024 12:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: In [0] I had noticed that we have no automated verification that global variables are declared in header files.  (For global functions, we have this through -Wmissing-prototypes.)  As I mentioned there, I

Re: consider -Wmissing-variable-declarations

2024-05-10 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 09/05/2024 12:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: In [0] I had noticed that we have no automated verification that global variables are declared in header files. (For global functions, we have this through -Wmissing-prototypes.) As I mentioned there, I discovered the Clang compiler option

consider -Wmissing-variable-declarations

2024-05-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
In [0] I had noticed that we have no automated verification that global variables are declared in header files. (For global functions, we have this through -Wmissing-prototypes.) As I mentioned there, I discovered the Clang compiler option -Wmissing-variable-declarations, which does exactly