On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:57:42AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> How about: ".. %10" INT64_FORMAT " .. " ?
> >
> > Well, it won't work because unlike <inttypes.h>, Postgres *_FORMAT
> > includes '%' in it.
> >
> > I guess that why <inttypes.h> does not do it...
>
> Hmm, I guess we could change that, but it would create a hazard for
> thirty-party code that wants to be cross-version, and for
> back-patching. We could work around that by doing something more
> complex, like creating additional symbols, but I'm thinking it ain't
> worth it just for this.
Changing existing definition is bad idea indeed.
And long-term path should be to move to standard int types,
so another custom definition seems counter-productive.
(OTOH, the 2 int64 _FORMATs are the only formats we maintain.)
In this case the simple approach would be to use 'long long':
".. %10lld ..", (long long)(..)
At least ecpg code uses it freely, and nobody has complained, so I guess
we don't have any platforms that do not have it.
--
marko
