Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 10:20 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Another rather serious problem here is that we no longer provide
>> macro PG_INT64_TYPE, which seems rather likely to break applications
>> that were relying on it. That is part of our external API, we
>> can't just remove it on a whim.
> I had concluded that PG_INT64_TYPE wasn't part of our external API but
> pg_int64 was, based on the comment:
> /* Define a signed 64-bit integer type for use in client API declarations. */
> -typedef PG_INT64_TYPE pg_int64;
> +typedef int64_t pg_int64;
Oh, hmm, maybe so. OTOH, that typedef breaks the idea of #define'ing
PG_INT64_TYPE as int64_t. We need this header to be readable without
any prior system headers, so I'm afraid we're all the way back to
making configure derive the name of a 64-bit type.
regards, tom lane
