On 8/5/16 1:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> No, I don't think it's sufficient after a multiplication by 10. That
> would be enough to shift some bits clear out of the word, but there's
> no certainty that the new sign bit would be 1.
>
> The scheme used in scanint8 is safe. But I think it was written that way
> mainly to avoid hard-wired assumptions about how wide int64 is, a
> consideration that's a mite obsolete now.
OK, I did it like int8, and added more tests. My original patch didn't
get the most negative integer right.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services