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

Re: uintptr_t for Datum

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum
Date: 2009-12-31 16:46:22
Message-ID: 9837222c0912310846u7845cac9v55a534c953c1766b@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2009/12/31 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> 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?

Hey, it got your attention ;)


>  Where's the logic to provide a definition of
> intptr_t if the platform fails to?  The lack of attention to updating

autoconf does that. This is exactly what broke on Bruce's platform,
and autoconf fixed it in the way that is included in the patch.


> the comments about Datum doesn't give me a warm feeling either.

Will look over that.


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

That also came out of Bruce's patch. Bruce, can you look at doing
that? I don't have a machine easily accessible with the right autoconf
version ATM :(

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-12-31 16:53:12
Subject: Re: point_ops for GiST
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-12-31 16:40:48
Subject: Re: uintptr_t for Datum

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