Re: [HACKERS] taking stdbool.h into use

On 1/16/18 01:14, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I don't see it either.  I think the actually useful parts of that patch
>> were to declare record_image_cmp's result correctly as int rather than
>> bool, and to cope with varlena fields of unequal size.  Unfortunately
>> there seems to be no contemporaneous mailing list discussion, so
>> it's not clear what Kevin based this change on.
> 
> This was a hotfix after a buildfarm breakage, the base commit being
> f566515.
> 
>> Want to try reverting the GET_X_BYTES() parts of it and see if the
>> buildfarm complains?
> 
> So, Peter, are you planning to do so?

Here is a proposed patch set to clean this up.  First, add some test
coverage for record_image_cmp.  (There wasn't any, only for
record_image_eq as part of MV testing.)  Then, remove the GET_ macros
from record_image_{eq,cmp}.  And finally remove all that byte-masking
stuff from postgres.h.

>> Note if that if we simplify the GetDatum macros, it's possible that
>> record_image_cmp would change behavior, since it might now see signed not
>> unsigned values depending on whether the casts do sign extension or not.
>> Not sure if that'd be a problem.

I wasn't able to construct such a case.  Everything still works unsigned
end-to-end, I think.  But if you can think of a case, we can throw it
into the tests.  The tests already contain cases of comparing positive
and negative integers.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services