Re: AW: AW: Re: RELEASE STOPPER? nonportable int64 constant s in pg_crc.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: AW: AW: Re: RELEASE STOPPER? nonportable int64 constant s in pg_crc.c
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.30.0103241317570.2319-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: AW: AW: Re: RELEASE STOPPER? nonportable int64 constant s in pg_crc.c  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: AW: AW: Re: RELEASE STOPPER? nonportable int64 constant s in pg_crc.c
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane writes:

> Okay.  I've committed a configure check that tests to see whether a
> macro defined as above compiles, and if so it will be used (if we are
> using "long long" for int64).  Hopefully the check will prevent breakage
> on machines where LL is not appropriate.

I don't see what this configure check buys us, since it does not check for
anything that's ever been reported not working.  Do you think there are
platforms that have 'long long int' but no 'LL' suffix?  That seems more
than unlikely.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: 7.1 docs
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: 7.1 docs