Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
Date
Msg-id 20160211183929.g7hyjncswhlij6q6@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
List pgsql-hackers
On 2016-02-11 13:37:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > And anyway, these macros are a potential issue even without stdbool.h
> > style booleans.
> 
> Absolutely; they don't work safely for testing bits that aren't in the
> rightmost byte of a flag word, for instance.  I'm on board with making
> these fixes, I'm just unconvinced that stdbool is a good reason for it.

Oh, ok. Interactions with stdbool was what made me looking into this,
that's primarily why I mentioned it.   What's your thinking about
back-patching, independent of that then?



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794