Re: INT64_MIN and _MAX

Hi,

On 2015-03-22 17:20:22 +0000, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> This replaces the one I posted before; it does both INT64_MIN/MAX and
> INT32_MIN/MAX, and also int16/int8/uint*. Uses of 0x7fffffff in code
> have been replaced unless there was a reason not to, with either INT_MAX
> or INT32_MAX according to the type required.

Any reason you did that for most of 0x7FFFFFFF, but not for the
corresponding 0xFFFFFFFF/unsigned case? I'd like to either avoid going
around changing other definitions, or do a somewhat systematic job.

> What I have _not_ done yet is audit uses of INT_MIN/MAX to see which
> ones should really be INT32_MIN/MAX.

I'm doubtful it's worthwhile to do check that all over the codebase...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services