Re: more C99 cleanup

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: more C99 cleanup
Date: 2025-11-28 07:40:50
Message-ID: 3b12679c-5282-4429-945d-fbb0639562ea@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 21.11.25 16:35, Tom Lane wrote:
> * In 0003, we can't be very sure what "isblank((unsigned char) c)"
> will do with non-ASCII input data, except that it could very
> easily do insane things with fragments of a multibyte character.
> I recommend keeping pg_isblank but redefining it along the lines of
>
> bool
> pg_isblank(unsigned char c)
> {
> return (!IS_HIGHBIT_SET(c) && isblank(c));
> }
>
> to ensure the previous treatment of non-ASCII data.
> (It could be made static in hba.c, perhaps)

Ok, done that way.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Banck 2025-11-28 08:08:50 Re: [PATCH] Expose checkpoint timestamp and duration in pg_stat_checkpointer
Previous Message Daniel Cyran 2025-11-28 07:03:57 Revisiting ALTER COLUMN POSITION support