Re: patch for getXXX methods

From: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>
To: pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com
Cc: "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch for getXXX methods
Date: 2004-07-11 15:04:56
Message-ID: 40F15718.7000302@opencloud.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Dave Cramer wrote:
> Attached, with -cb this time

Thanks. Comments:

How you handle bytes and shorts is inconsistent with how you handle
longs; we should consistently do it one way or the other. Since you lose
precision going via a double, that probably means the BigInteger approach.

The shared conversion/rangecheck logic should be done once in a helper
function rather than duplicated -- call the helper with appropriate
range info and cast the result.

I still don't like silently discarding any fractional portion of the value.

-O

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dario V. Fassi 2004-07-11 19:18:44 Re: Timestamp Question
Previous Message Oliver Jowett 2004-07-11 14:54:34 Re: No class found for inet