From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: MinGW / Windows / printf format specifiers |
Date: | 2016-02-19 07:57:01 |
Message-ID: | CAMsr+YGh1fhc5f4JnA1HSi5o+tdndfKvVA-5q8VzJSOWQV738w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 19 February 2016 at 12:15, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> wrote:
>
> The cause seems to be that Windows conventions have int = long = int32
> (even on 64-bit platforms) and only 'long long' = int64.
Yes, it's an LLP64 platform.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit_computing
> The Java JNI
> headers of course know this, so they type jlong as 'long long', while
> jint they type as 'long' - curiously, because they could just call it
> int and get the same width. Maybe a habit from a 16-bit C environment?
>
They should be using the (u)int(nn)_t typedefs like int64_t, but some
compilers lag in their support for them.
> Have issues like this been dealt with in PostgreSQL code before, and did
> a favorite approach emerge?
> <http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers>
INT64_FORMAT and UINT64_FORMAT
src/include/c.h
git grep INT64_FORMAT
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-02-19 08:30:03 | [PoC] WaitLatchOrSocketMulti (Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794) |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-02-19 07:33:21 | Re: WAL logging problem in 9.4.3? |