On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:57:42AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> How about: ".. %10" INT64_FORMAT " .. " ?
> > Well, it won't work because unlike <inttypes.h>, Postgres *_FORMAT
> > includes '%' in it.
> > I guess that why <inttypes.h> does not do it...
> Hmm, I guess we could change that, but it would create a hazard for
> thirty-party code that wants to be cross-version, and for
> back-patching. We could work around that by doing something more
> complex, like creating additional symbols, but I'm thinking it ain't
> worth it just for this.
Changing existing definition is bad idea indeed.
And long-term path should be to move to standard int types,
so another custom definition seems counter-productive.
(OTOH, the 2 int64 _FORMATs are the only formats we maintain.)
In this case the simple approach would be to use 'long long':
".. %10lld ..", (long long)(..)
At least ecpg code uses it freely, and nobody has complained, so I guess
we don't have any platforms that do not have it.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jaime Casanova||Date: 2012-03-28 13:16:46|
|Subject: Re: triggers and inheritance tree|
|Previous:||From: Shigeru HANADA||Date: 2012-03-28 13:11:47|
|Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server|
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Fujii Masao||Date: 2012-03-28 14:43:56|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock
monotonicity and timing|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-03-28 12:57:42|
|Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to
measure clock monotonicity and timing|