Re: [HACKERS] "24" < INT_MIN returns TRUE ???

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jan Wieck <jwieck(at)debis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL HACKERS <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] "24" < INT_MIN returns TRUE ???
Date: 1999-07-09 17:07:04
Message-ID: 199907091707.NAA02248@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I said:
> > Do you have <limits.h>, and if so how does it define INT_MIN?
>
> Actually, looking closer, it doesn't matter whether you have <limits.h>,
> because there is yet a *third* bug in numutils.c:
>
> #ifdef HAVE_LIMITS
> #include <limits.h>
> #endif
>
> should be
>
> #ifdef HAVE_LIMITS_H
> ...
>
> because that is how configure and config.h spell the configuration
> symbol. Thus, <limits.h> is never included on *any* platform,
> and our broken default INT_MIN is always used.

Yes, I caught this when you made that comment about the LIMIT test. I
am checking all the other HAVE_ tests.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Leon 1999-07-09 17:07:36 Re[2]: [HACKERS] Fwd: Joins and links
Previous Message Brook Milligan 1999-07-09 17:02:14 Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size