From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
Cc: | Stephane Raimbault <stephane(dot)raimbault(at)free(dot)fr>, pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: libpq 7.4 and binary cursor |
Date: | 2004-06-10 15:39:25 |
Message-ID: | 25064.1086881965@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-interfaces |
"Jeroen T. Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> writes:
> This trick may work on some compilers and/or platforms, but it's not
> correct C. The language does not guarantee that the members of a union
> will be allocated in the exact same address, or even that they will
> overlap.
Nonsense. C99 6.7.2.1:
A pointer to a union object, suitably converted, points to
each of its members (or if a member is a bit-field, then to
the unit in which it resides), and vice versa.
It does say that the results of fetching a union member other than
the one last stored to are implementation-dependent, but not that
the implementation can choose to put them in different places.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2004-06-10 16:58:51 | Re: libpq 7.4 and binary cursor |
Previous Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2004-06-10 15:04:12 | Re: libpq 7.4 and binary cursor |