Tom Lane wrote:
> Giles Lean <giles@nemeton.com.au> writes:
> > When talking of near-current systems with 64 bit off_t you are not
> > going to find one without support for 64 bit integral types.
>
> I tend to agree with Giles on this point. A non-integral representation
> of off_t is theoretically possible but I don't believe it exists in
> practice. Before going far out of our way to allow it, we should first
> require some evidence that it's needed on a supported or
> likely-to-be-supported platform.
>
> time_t isn't guaranteed to be an integral type either if you read the
> oldest docs about it ... but no one believes that in practice ...
I think fpos_t is the non-integral one. I thought off_t almost always
was integral.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073