On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:47:52 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> One bug I see in it is that you'd better make the alignment 'd' if the
> type is to be int8. Also I much dislike these changes:
>
> - int32 i = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
> + int64 i = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
As I have made the few corrections that you pointed out, should I go
ahead and commit so that it can be tested in a wider group? Also,
there are further ideas out there to improve the type further that
would be easier to handle with this out of the way.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.