Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix

From: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Postgresql <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix
Date: 2001-04-05 08:40:03
Message-ID: 20010405104003.A15090@feivel.credativ.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 10:01:53AM +0200, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> I do agree with the statement, that HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 shoud be
> defined on all platforms where the compiler understands it to be 64bits.
> It would imho be the responsibility of backend code, to only do one of
> the two if both are defined.

I just committed some changes so that ecpg does acceptt "long long"
variables all the time, but repleces them with type "long" if
HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT_64 is not defined. This appears to be a strategy similar
to the one used by the backend.

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael(at)Fam-Meskes(dot)De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Galbavy 2001-04-05 09:06:08 release dates and announcements ?
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2001-04-05 08:01:54 Re: ecpg long int problem on alpha + fix