From: | "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | Stephane Raimbault <stephane(dot)raimbault(at)free(dot)fr> |
Cc: | pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: libpq 7.4 and binary cursor |
Date: | 2004-06-10 15:04:12 |
Message-ID: | 20040610150411.GD27490@xs4all.nl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-interfaces |
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 04:30:27PM +0200, Stephane Raimbault wrote:
> union {
> double d;
> int64_t i64;
> } swap;
> uint32_t tab_uint32[2];
[...]
> /* Fusion */
> swap.i64 = tab_uint32[0];
> swap.i64 <<= 32;
> swap.i64 |= tab_uint32[1];
>
> /* Cast */
> return swap.d;
This trick may work on some compilers and/or platforms, but it's not
correct C. The language does not guarantee that the members of a union
will be allocated in the exact same address, or even that they will
overlap. What if it registerizes swap.d and/or swap.i64? It may even
recognize one of the two as uninitialized, and the other as a dead value.
That will get you very compact code, but not the effect you want.
To see how it may go wrong, imagine your compiler implemented "union"
as "#define union struct". I think this is all described in the C FAQ,
BTW.
Jeroen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-10 15:39:25 | Re: libpq 7.4 and binary cursor |
Previous Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2004-06-10 14:56:29 | Re: Problem with PQexecPrepared |