On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 15:15, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> AFAICS that could only happen if "double" has 8-byte alignment
> requirement but int64 does not. I recall some discussion about
> that possibility a month or two back, but I think we concluded
> that we weren't going to support it.
ok
> I guess what I mostly don't like about df0f4feef is the hardwired "8"
> constants. Yeah, it's hard to see how sizeof(uint64) isn't 8, but
> it's not very readable like this IMO.
Yeah, that was just down to lack of any SIZEOF_* macro to tell me
uint64 was 8 bytes.
I can revert df0f4feef, but would prefer just to get the green light
for d5ee4db0e from those 32-bit arm animals before doing so.
David
