Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Postgresql <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix
Date: 2001-04-05 17:31:13
Message-ID: 25692.986491873@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> I just committed some changes so that ecpg does acceptt "long long"
> variables all the time, but repleces them with type "long" if
> HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 is not defined.

This looks like a workable strategy for now. Ten years from now, when
"long" means 64 bits everywhere and people are starting to use "long long"
to mean 128 bits, we'll have to revisit it ;-)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bill Studenmund 2001-04-05 17:33:39 Test results for postgresql-7.1RC2 on NetBSD/macppc 1.5
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-04-05 17:05:37 Re: AW: Re: TODO list