Re: A few warnings on Windows

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christian Ullrich <chris(at)chrullrich(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A few warnings on Windows
Date: 2018-05-03 23:13:10
Message-ID: CAEepm=1JfbUCWcPa0ESVXX19chMeKKPzNRuS49Pm35+Gg8y_qg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 2:46 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 5/3/18 10:18, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Christian Ullrich <chris(at)chrullrich(dot)net> writes:
>>>> Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>>>>> Does anyone know what line 174 of pyconfig.h happens to say?
>>
>>> typedef _W64 int ssize_t;
>>> , in a "not for 64-bit" block.
>>> <https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/v3.6.3/PC/pyconfig.h>, 3.6.3 is
>>> the installed version on whelk.
>>
>> Thanks. Not a lot we're going to be able to do about silencing that
>> one, I'm afraid. Too bad they haven't wrapped that stanza in
>> "#ifndef HAVE_SSIZE_T".
>
> There is still time to send a patch for Python 3.7.

Maybe we could poke this? https://bugs.python.org/issue11717

Apparently ssize_t is not defined on Windows (it's from POSIX, not C)
and various projects step on each other's toes defining it. On 64 bit
systems we both use __int64. On 32 bit systems, we chose long and
they chose int. If we changed our definition to use int too, I assume
that would fix the warnings here but might risk creating the opposite
problem somewhere else...

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-05-03 23:14:55 Re: ignore_system_indexes affects DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE reported number of objects dropped
Previous Message Malcontent null 2018-05-03 22:37:10 Re: Why Not MySQL?