From b30e23fe588be6dd61be07eeac96adfbddfcc54c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tom Lane Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2021 16:59:17 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Make ecpg's rjulmdy() and rmdyjul() agree with their declarations. We had "short *mdy" in the extern declarations, but "short mdy[3]" in the actual function definitions. Per C99 these are equivalent, but recent versions of gcc have started to issue warnings about the inconsistency. Clean it up before the warnings get any more widespread. This back-patches commit 1b242f42b into out-of-support branches, pursuant to newly-established project policy. The point is to suppress scary-looking warnings so that people building these branches needn't expend brain cells verifying that it's safe to ignore the warnings. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/d0316012-ece7-7b7e-2d36-9c38cb77cb3b@enterprisedb.com --- src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c b/src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c index 9f7776ee919..0b63cfb3630 100644 --- a/src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c +++ b/src/interfaces/ecpg/compatlib/informix.c @@ -533,7 +533,7 @@ rtoday(date * d) } int -rjulmdy(date d, short mdy[3]) +rjulmdy(date d, short *mdy) { int mdy_int[3]; @@ -584,7 +584,7 @@ rfmtdate(date d, char *fmt, char *str) } int -rmdyjul(short mdy[3], date * d) +rmdyjul(short *mdy, date * d) { int mdy_int[3];