Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes:
> What is the latest theory on using int4 vs. int32 in C code?
> (equivalently int2, int16)
I thought the general idea was to use int32 most places, but int4 in
catalog declarations. I don't think it's tremendously important if
somebody uses the other though.
> While we're at it, how do we feel about using C standard types like
> int32_t instead of (or initially in addition to) our own definitions?
Can't get very excited about this either. The most likely outcome of
a campaign to substitute the standard types is that back-patching would
become a truly painful activity. IMO, anything that is going to result
in tens of thousands of diffs had better have a more-than-cosmetic
reason. (That wouldn't apply if we only used int32_t in new code ...
but then, instead of two approved ways to do it, there would be three.
Which doesn't seem like it improves matters.)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
