From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: refactoring - share str2*int64 functions |
Date: | 2019-08-01 09:34:34 |
Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1908011118370.2692@lancre |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michaël-san,
>> I have looked quickly at it, but I'm not sure that there is an agreement
>> about what should be done precisely, so the feedback is not clearly
>> actionable.
>
> Per the latest trends, it seems that the input of Andres was kind of
> the most interesting pieces.
Yes, definitely. I understood that we want in "string.h" something like
(just the spirit):
typedef enum {
STRTOINT_OK, STRTOINT_RANGE_ERROR, STRTOINT_SYNTAX_ERROR
} strtoint_status;
strtoint_status pg_strtoint64(const char * str, int64 * result);
However there is a contrary objective to have a unified interface,
but there also exists a:
extern uint64 pg_strtouint64(const char *str, char **endptr, int base);
called 3 times, always with base == 10. We have a similar name but a
totally different interface, so basically it would have to be replaced
by something like the first interface.
> If you don't have room for it, I would not mind doing the legwork
> myself.
I think that it would be quick if the what is clear enough, so I can do
it.
--
Fabien.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2019-08-01 09:38:09 | Re: partition routing layering in nodeModifyTable.c |
Previous Message | vignesh C | 2019-08-01 09:32:14 | Store FullTransactionId in TwoPhaseFileHeader/GlobalTransactionData |