| From: | "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "David Helgason" <david(at)uti(dot)is> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: implemented missing bitSetBit() and bitGetBit() |
| Date: | 2004-02-04 19:36:33 |
| Message-ID: | D90A5A6C612A39408103E6ECDD77B8294CE619@voyager.corporate.connx.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bit sets are remarkably useful functionality. I suggest putting it
into the core product.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Conway [mailto:neilc(at)samurai(dot)com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 11:22 AM
> To: David Helgason
> Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] implemented missing bitSetBit() and bitGetBit()
>
>
> David Helgason <david(at)uti(dot)is> writes:
> > I needed these, so I went and implemented them myself.
>
> I didn't see any followup to this: do we want to include this
> in the main tree, contrib/, or not at all?
>
> -Neil (who has no opinion on the matter, but just wants to
> make sure this doesn't fall through the cracks)
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-02-04 19:51:33 | Re: implemented missing bitSetBit() and bitGetBit() |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-02-04 19:22:05 | Re: implemented missing bitSetBit() and bitGetBit() |