Re: uintptr_t for Datum

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Date: 2009-12-31 16:40:48
Message-ID: 630.1262277648@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> Attached patch is the part of the win64 patch that changes Datum to be
> uintptr_t, and associated changes, with only very minor changes from
> me. It also includes autoconf tests that I tricked Bruce into fixing
> for me :-)

> Comments?

This is a joke no? Where's the logic to provide a definition of
intptr_t if the platform fails to? The lack of attention to updating
the comments about Datum doesn't give me a warm feeling either.

BTW, it looks like the patch is showing a manual change to
pg_config.h.in. Don't do that. Run autoheader.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2009-12-31 16:46:22 Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-12-31 16:28:02 Re: IntArray in c.h