Re: ssize_t vs win64

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ssize_t vs win64
Date: 2010-01-02 20:41:08
Message-ID: 9837222c1001021241r4b0eff75tdc886781554e914a@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 16:59, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> I'm not entirely sure what the type is for, though,
>
> It's supposed to be the same width as size_t but signed.  I would assume
> that it should be 64 bits on Win64.

Yeah, seems reasonable. I'll put in that #ifdef in win32.h then.

> According to SUS this type should be provided by sys/types.h:
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/systypes.h.html
> so I'm not clear why we have to provide it ourselves at all.

Should, but it's not included in types.h in the Microsoft SDK:s. It
seems to have time_t and off_t, but that's about it.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2010-01-02 21:11:16 psql tab completion for DO blocks
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-01-02 19:41:16 Re: Add subdirectory support for DATA/DOCS with PGXS