From: | Kelly Burkhart <kelly(at)tradebotsystems(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Kelly Burkhart <kelly(at)kkcsm(dot)net>, pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 32-bit ints on 64-bit linux |
Date: | 2005-03-21 19:28:59 |
Message-ID: | 1111433339.26601.89.camel@krb06 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 09:25, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2005 16:05 schrieb Kelly Burkhart:
> > I'm attaching a patch which fixes this, and some other questionable
> > sprintf format strings in convert.c.
>
> Do we have any evidence that the other ones are broken?
No, I do not.
I suggested that the other format strings were questionable based on a
reading of the glibc printf man page. Aside from the 32-bit integer
problem the other formats work fine in the unmodified form on the three
platforms I use.
Can anyone with a better understanding of the libc standard comment on
the "correctness" of the following lines?
int8_t i1;
int16_t i2;
printf("%d", i1);
printf("%d", i2);
vs:
printf("%hhd", i1);
printf("%hd", i2);
-K
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-21 19:46:29 | Re: 32-bit ints on 64-bit linux |
Previous Message | Philippe Lang | 2005-03-21 07:30:26 | Command Prompt Commercial ODBC driver? |