Re: Win64 warnings about size_t

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Win64 warnings about size_t
Date: 2010-01-02 16:06:13
Message-ID: 201001021606.o02G6Dq02295@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 03:13, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> I have adapted the win64 patches a bit, and now have a working build.
> >> As in it runs the regression tests fine. However, I have well over a
> >> thousand warnings of the type:
> >> conversion from 'size_t' to 'int', possible loss of data
> >>
> >> My first 5-6 checks of where these happen are all cases where we
> >> assign the result of strlen() something to an int, or call a function
> >> taking an int as parameter with the result of strlen() in there.
> >>
> >> strlen() returns size_t, which AFAICS is per the standard and not even
> >> a Microsoft-specific idea. size_t is 8-bit - but it appears to be
> >> 8-bit on Linux as well, when in 64-bit mode.
> >
> > Uh, you mean size_t is 8 _bytes_ on Win64? ?That would make sense.
>
> Yes, 8 bytes, 64 bit. Of course :-) Sorry.

If we are storing potentially 64-bit values in 32-bit variables and we
know the value is going to fit, it would be nice if we could document
this some way, perhaps with some typedef data type.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-01-02 16:09:06 Re: pgsql: Fix one more cast for _open_osfhandle().
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-01-02 15:59:57 Re: ssize_t vs win64