Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 3:49 AM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> While going through numutils.c I found the following thing:
>> --- a/src/backend/utils/adt/numutils.c
>> +++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/numutils.c
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ pg_ltoa(int32 value, char *a)
>> * Avoid problems with the most negative integer not being representable
>> * as a positive integer.
>> */
>> - if (value == (-2147483647 - 1))
>> + if (value == PG_INT32_MIN)
>> {
>> memcpy(a, "-2147483648", 12);
>> return;
>> Attached is a patch. The interesting part is that pg_lltoa is not
>> missing the check on PG_INT64_MIN.
> Committed.
I am not very convinced that this is an improvement, because you took
what had been two hard-wired constants and replaced them with a symbol
and a hard-wired constant. This is more prone to break, not less so.
If there were a way to stringify PG_INT32_MIN's value for use in the
memcpy (which would then better be strcpy), then converting *both*
constants would be an improvement --- but otherwise I think this was
best left alone.
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
