Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

AW: AW: broken locale in 7.0.2 without multibyte support (F reeBSD 4.1-RELEASE) ?

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: AW: AW: broken locale in 7.0.2 without multibyte support (F reeBSD 4.1-RELEASE) ?
Date: 2000-12-04 17:08:23
Message-ID: 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368166@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > I am a sceptic to the many casts. Would'nt the clean 
> solution be, to use
> > unsigned char througout the code ?
> 
> No; see the prior discussion.
> 
> > The casts only help to avoid compiler
> > warnings or errors. They do not solve the underlying problem.
> 
> You are mistaken.

You are of course correct, that they might solve the particular underlying problem,
sorry, I did not actually read or verify the committed code.
But don't they in general obfuscate cases where the callee does want
unsigned/signed chars ?

My assumption would be, that we need [un]signed char casts for library functions,
but we should not need them for internal code, no ? What is actually the reason 
to have them both in PostgreSQL code ?

My concern stems from a very bad experience with wrong signedness of chars
on AIX.

Andreas

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2000-12-04 17:24:29
Subject: Re: Postgresql on dynix/ptx system
Previous:From: Arno A. KarnerDate: 2000-12-04 16:37:18
Subject: update on compiling postgres on sco

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group