On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 10/29/17 08:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I spotted a couple of other things while looking at your patches and
>> the code tree.
>>
>> - return (ginCompareItemPointers(&btree->itemptr, iptr) > 0) ? TRUE :
>> FALSE;
>> + return (ginC
On 10/29/17 08:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I had a look at this patch series. Patches 1, 2 (macos headers indeed
> show that NSUNLINKMODULE_OPTION_NONE is set to 0x0), 3 to 7 look fine
> to me.
Committed 4 and 5 together.
> I spotted a couple of other things while looking at your patches and
> t
On 10/29/17 08:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>> Here is an updated patch set. This is just a rebase of the previous
>> set, no substantial changes. Based on the discussion so far, I'm
>> proposing that 0001 through 0007 could be ready to
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> Here is an updated patch set. This is just a rebase of the previous
> set, no substantial changes. Based on the discussion so far, I'm
> proposing that 0001 through 0007 could be ready to commit after review,
> whereas the remaining two
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> While warnings for this would be lovely, I don't see how we can expect to
> get any. This is perfectly correct C code no matter whether isprimary
> is C99 bool or is typedef'd to char ... you just end up with different
> values of isprimary, shou
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> It seems to me that this proves the point of the proposed patch. You
>> had better use a zero-equality comparison for such bitwise operation,
>> and so you ought to do that:
>> boolisprimary = (flags & INDEX_CREATE_IS_PRIMARY) != 0;
> Rig
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Right, exactly. But my point is that with the whole patch series
> applied I didn't get any warnings.
Sorry, I misread your message. You use Linux I suppose, what's your compiler?
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsq
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > I gave this a quick run, to see if my compiler would complain for things
> > like this:
> >
> >boolisprimary = flags & INDEX_CREATE_IS_PRIMARY;
> >
> > (taken from the first patch at
> > https://post
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> I gave this a quick run, to see if my compiler would complain for things
> like this:
>
>boolisprimary = flags & INDEX_CREATE_IS_PRIMARY;
>
> (taken from the first patch at
> https://postgr.es/m/20171023161503.ohkybquxrlech7d7@a
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Here is an updated patch set. This is just a rebase of the previous
> set, no substantial changes. Based on the discussion so far, I'm
> proposing that 0001 through 0007 could be ready to commit after review,
> whereas the remaining two need more work at some later time.
On 9/14/17 22:35, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> 0005-Make-casting-between-bool-and-GinTernaryValue-more-r.patch
>> 0008-Use-stdbool.h-if-available.patch
>
>> These need some more work based on Tom's feedback.
>
>> Attached is a new patch set. Based on the discussion so far, 0001
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> 0005-Make-casting-between-bool-and-GinTernaryValue-more-r.patch
> 0008-Use-stdbool.h-if-available.patch
> These need some more work based on Tom's feedback.
> Attached is a new patch set. Based on the discussion so far, 0001
> through 0007 might be ready; the other tw
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Some not so long time ago, it was discussed to look into taking
> stdbool.h into use. The reason was that third-party libraries (perl?,
> ldap?, postgis?) are increasingly doing so, and having incompatible
> definitions of bool could/does create a mess.
> Here is a pat
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Don't know how far back you need to go to find Windows machines
> with 4-byte bool, but we have some pretty long-in-the-tooth
> buildfarm critters in that lineage, too.
>From VS 2003 and upwards the size has always been 1:
https://msdn.microsoft
I wrote:
> gaur/pademelon isn't booted up right now, but it might provide
> an example of a system that lacks altogether.
> (If it doesn't, I'd be willing to concede that we need not
> consider that scenario anymore.)
For the record --- pademelon (vendor cc on that box) doesn't have
at all. gau
Thomas Munro writes:
> However my system has sizeof(bool) == 1 and so do all the systems I
> have access to (x86 + POWER). Where can we find a computer with
> sizeof(bool) == 4? According to the intertubes OSX on POWER and
> Windows 32 bit systems had that in ancient prehistory but they don't
>
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> Some not so long time ago, it was discussed to look into taking
> stdbool.h into use. The reason was that third-party libraries (perl?,
> ldap?, postgis?) are increasingly doing so, and having incompatible
> definitions of bool could/does
17 matches
Mail list logo
