Re: Bug in libpq implentation and omission in documentation?

On 08.08.2012 12:36, Jim Vanns wrote:
> Ah ha. Yes, you're correct. It does mention here that an Int16 is used
> to specify the number of parameter format codes, values etc.
>
> I suggest then that the documentation is updated to reflect this? Anf
> again, perhaps the 'int' for nParams should be an int16_t or short?

I don't think we should change the function signature for this, but I 
think a sanity check for "nParams < 32768" in libpq would be in order.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com