Re: ssize_t vs win64

On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 01:01, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> > Tom Lane wrote:
>> >> I think the Python guys are up against the same problem as us, namely
>> >> substituting for the platform's failure to define the type.
>>
>> > I am unclear if accepting what Python chose as a default is the right
>> > route vs. doing more research.
>>
>> What exactly do you think we might do differently?  There is only one
>> sane definition for ssize_t on a 64-bit platform.
>
> Well, I saw two definitions listed in this thread, and it wasn't clear
> to me the Python one was known to be the correct one:
>
>        PostgreSQL has it as
>        typedef long ssize_t;
>
>        And python has it as:
>        typedef __int64 ssize_t;

You're missing the crucial point: That is that PostgreSQL uses long on
*32-bit*. Python uses __int64 on *64-bit*. PostgreSQL didn't *have* a
definition on 64-bit, so we fell back on the 32-bit one.

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