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

Re: uintptr_t for Datum

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Date: 2009-12-31 16:40:48
Message-ID: 630.1262277648@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> Attached patch is the part of the win64 patch that changes Datum to be
> uintptr_t, and associated changes, with only very minor changes from
> me. It also includes autoconf tests that I tricked Bruce into fixing
> for me :-)

> Comments?

This is a joke no?  Where's the logic to provide a definition of
intptr_t if the platform fails to?  The lack of attention to updating
the comments about Datum doesn't give me a warm feeling either.

BTW, it looks like the patch is showing a manual change to
pg_config.h.in.  Don't do that.  Run autoheader.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2009-12-31 16:46:22
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-12-31 16:28:02
Subject: Re: IntArray in c.h

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