| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | AW: AW: broken locale in 7.0.2 without multibyte suppor t (F reeBSD 4.1-RELEASE) ? |
| Date: | 2000-12-04 17:08:23 |
| Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368166@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > I am a sceptic to the many casts. Would'nt the clean
> solution be, to use
> > unsigned char througout the code ?
>
> No; see the prior discussion.
>
> > The casts only help to avoid compiler
> > warnings or errors. They do not solve the underlying problem.
>
> You are mistaken.
You are of course correct, that they might solve the particular underlying problem,
sorry, I did not actually read or verify the committed code.
But don't they in general obfuscate cases where the callee does want
unsigned/signed chars ?
My assumption would be, that we need [un]signed char casts for library functions,
but we should not need them for internal code, no ? What is actually the reason
to have them both in PostgreSQL code ?
My concern stems from a very bad experience with wrong signedness of chars
on AIX.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-12-04 17:24:29 | Re: Postgresql on dynix/ptx system |
| Previous Message | Arno A. Karner | 2000-12-04 16:37:18 | update on compiling postgres on sco |