On Aug 20, 2025, at 15:40, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 10:46:58AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
+1 for getting rid of those while we're doing janitorial work here. They're not *quite* duplicates though, for instance next_pow2_int has different response to out-of-range values than pg_nextpower2_32.
This would mean introducing more flavors in pg_bitutils.h with limit checks. That does not seem completely right to do in this file, which is a wrapper for all the __builtin_*() calls? A second point is on the signedness but we could just cap the maximum at (PG_UINT{32,64}_MAX / 2), I guess, with two new routines like: uint64 pg_nextpower2_64_max(uint64 num); uint32 pg_prevpower2_32_max(uint32 num);
I wonder if we can keep the same naming style to make the new function name like next_pow2_64()?
--
Chao Li (Evan) HighGo Software Co., Ltd. https://www.highgo.com/
