Tom Lane wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
>> Tom Lane napsal(a):
>>> Most places where we've dealt with this before, we use double, which is
>>> guaranteed to be available whereas uint64 is not ...
>
>> Is this requirement still valid?
>
> Yes.
Maybe we should just bite the bullet, and implement int64 emulation
for platforms that don't provide one? I was thinking that something
like "typedef struct { int32 low, int32 high } int64", plus a few
Macros for basic arithmetic should do the trick.
Not particularly rewarding work, given that all major platforms *do*
support int64 - but it'd prevent the discussion that starts everytime
someone proposes a patch that depends on int64.
regards, Florian Pflug