> > 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
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2000-12-04 17:24:29|
|Subject: Re: Postgresql on dynix/ptx system|
|Previous:||From: Arno A. Karner||Date: 2000-12-04 16:37:18|
|Subject: update on compiling postgres on sco|