Re: Use of "long" in incremental sort code

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Use of "long" in incremental sort code
Date: 2020-07-02 19:44:23
Message-ID: 864247.1593719063@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 12:39 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> mumble ssize_t mumble

> That's from POSIX, though. I imagine MSVC won't be happy (surprise!).

We've got quite a few uses of it already, so apparently it's fine.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James Coleman 2020-07-02 19:47:46 Re: Use of "long" in incremental sort code
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2020-07-02 19:42:48 Re: Use of "long" in incremental sort code