From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: use of int4/int32 in C code |
Date: | 2012-06-19 21:42:27 |
Message-ID: | 22993.1340142147@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I thought the general idea was to use int32 most places, but int4 in
>> catalog declarations. I don't think it's tremendously important if
>> somebody uses the other though.
> I concur with Peter that TMTOWTDI is not the right way to do this. I
> think we ought to get rid of int4 in code and use int32 everywhere.
I have not looked to see how many places do that. If it's a reasonably
small number of places, I'm OK with getting rid of int4 at the C level.
(int2/int8 the same of course.)
If we are going to do that, though, we need to actually remove those
typedefs. Leaving them around on the grounds that third-party code
might be using them will just allow cases to creep back in.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-06-19 21:46:56 | Re: [PATCH 10/16] Introduce the concept that wal has a 'origin' node |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-06-19 21:39:46 | Re: Backport of fsync queue compaction |