| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <sugita(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rejection of the smallest int8 |
| Date: | 2001-11-21 22:13:58 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0111212019560.614-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane writes:
> This has been proposed before. The problem with it is that it's
> not portable: the C standard does not specify the direction of rounding
> of integer division when the dividend is negative. So the test
> inside the loop that tries to detect overflow would be likely to fail
> on some machines.
>
> If you can see a way around that, we're all ears ...
Use strtoll/strtoull if available. They should be on "most" systems
anyway.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-11-21 22:14:20 | Re: beta3 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-11-21 21:39:48 | Re: beta3 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-11-21 22:15:04 | Re: Rejection of the smallest int8 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-11-21 22:12:54 | Re: Cross-references (was [PATCHES] PQescapeBytea documentation |