Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT
Date
Msg-id 26184.1526663276@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT  (Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com> writes:
>> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
>> BTW, is it possible to set up an ecpg test case to verify that this stuff
>> works?
>> It'd have to handle platforms without long long though, so I'm not
>> sure how to deal with that.

> Yes. I was expecting that at least bigint will works fine with sqlda in linux
> system but it seem did not?

After some thought I decided that the right fix is to add coverage for
both ECPGt_long and ECPGt_long_long.  Any given platform will test only
one of those two code paths, but that's probably fine, because that is
the only one it would use anyway.

Pushed it that way; the buildfarm will soon tell us if this was a
stupid idea ...

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #15080: ecpg on windows doesn't define HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT