Ken Camann wrote: > In trying to port postgres to 64-bit Windows, I've encountered a > number of issues which may (or may not) affect other compilers. If > you followed the other thread, this is mostly a summary with a bit > more details so feel free to ignore it. Some of these may have some > minor effects on other platforms, so they may be of interest (but I > doubt it, since no one has noticed/complained about them yet). This > post contains a small taxonomy of the problems, as well as some > discussion about the work that needs to be done in order to make > postgres portable to LLP64 data model compilers (in case someone else > is interested). I use the standard terms for discussing different > compiler data models, which are explained here: > > http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/lp64_wp.html > > Throughout this post I will assume sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(void*), > because I doubt you want to support a system where this is not the > case. > > When I try to compile postgres, I get 396 warnings. These come from > several different places: > > 1.) Most of the code involving strings requires a ILP32 or ILP64 to > not generate a warning. This means sizeof(int) == sizeof(size_t) == > 32 or 64, respectively. Something as simple as: > > int len; > > len = strlen(str); > ... > > int len; > > len = (int)strlen(str);
If we know we are addressing a datum that has to be <4GB, it would be best to use some typedef that is descriptive, like: len = (DatumLen)strlen(str); -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
