On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 9:42 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 2015-09-25 0:25 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com>: > >> On 9/24/15 3:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > >>> > >>> I would worry about the implicit casts you've added. They might cause > >>> problems. > >> > >> > >> Given the cycle created between numeric->decimal and decimal->numeric, I > >> can pretty much guarantee they will. In any case, I don't think implicit > >> casting from numeric->decimal is a good idea since it can overflow. I'm not > >> sure that the other direction is safe either... I can't remember offhand if > >> casting correctly obeys typmod or not. > >> > >> BTW, have you talked to Pavel about making these changes to his code? > >> Seems a shame to needlessly fork it. :/ > > > > > > yes, he talked with me, and I gave a agreement to continue/enhance/fork this > > project how will be necessary > > Bumping this ancient thread to say that DECFLOAT appears to have > landed in the SQL standard. I haven't looked at SQL:2016 myself by I > just saw this on Markus Winand's Modern SQL blog:
... and it has just been voted into the next revision of the C language: https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2018/11/12/c2x/ -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
