2010/2/10 Teodor Sigaev <teo...@sigaev.ru>:
>> So suppose at this point that step is the largest integer that can be
>> represented...
>>>
>>> ! step ++;
>>
>> Boom.
>>>
>>> ! step>>= 1;
>
> step>>= 1;
> step ++'
>
> Unboom?
Yeah, that'll work.
>>> !
>>> ! while(step> 0) {
>>> ! int i;
>>>
>>> ! for (i = step-1; i< nentry; i += 2 * step)
>>
>> And similarly here... if nentry is greater than maxint/2, then i += 2
>> * step will overflow, no?
>
> Agree, so
> for (i = step - 1; i < nentry && i >= 0; i += step << 1 /* *2 */)
I don't think you should do it this way. I can't immediately say
whether it's safe on all platforms, but it's certainly not clear.
Just put the test at the bottom of the loop the way I did it (after
fixing whatever I screwed up).
> Also, rb_free is removed per Tom's comment. Can I commit the patch?
Pending the above, go for it.
...Robert
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
