Re: Missing PG_INT32_MIN in numutils.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Missing PG_INT32_MIN in numutils.c
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRRfW+vrrVEMy0ZDm3pQ6Xy6xA15-Th-VAOv8M1cLEeyw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Missing PG_INT32_MIN in numutils.c  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 3:49 AM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> While going through numutils.c I found the following thing:
>> --- a/src/backend/utils/adt/numutils.c
>> +++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/numutils.c
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ pg_ltoa(int32 value, char *a)
>>      * Avoid problems with the most negative integer not being representable
>>      * as a positive integer.
>>      */
>> -   if (value == (-2147483647 - 1))
>> +   if (value == PG_INT32_MIN)
>>     {
>>         memcpy(a, "-2147483648", 12);
>>         return;
>> Attached is a patch. The interesting part is that pg_lltoa is not
>> missing the check on PG_INT64_MIN.
>
> Committed.

Thanks.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Why doesn't src/backend/port/win32/socket.c implement bind()?
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade documentation improvement patch