Re: ssize_t vs win64
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ssize_t vs win64 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 201001022340.o02Ne7K15965@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ssize_t vs win64 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: ssize_t vs win64
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 00:20, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > >> Seems kind of buggy. �They shouldn't be defining it at all. > > > Why not? Should they just stop using it? In that case, so should we, no? > > What's buggy is M$ failing to provide it in their <sys/types.h> header. > It's unlikely they'll pay any attention to our opinions, however. > > I think the Python guys are up against the same problem as us, namely > substituting for the platform's failure to define the type. I am unclear if accepting what Python chose as a default is the right route vs. doing more research. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: