Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 10:43:30 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: kjs@teews.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Cc: Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: documentation describing the range of a number type 'integer' is
 incorrect
Message-ID: <202110221343.rgmrpm6sy3be@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <162759765986.25752.13395472408540963267@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202110221343.rgmrpm6sy3be%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2021-Jul-29, PG Doc comments form wrote:

> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/datatype-numeric.html says that the range
> of a numeric type integer is -2147483648 to +2147483647 but
> PGTYPESnumeric_to_int considers -2147483648 (a perfectly valid 32-bit
> integer) to be invalid because it compares to -INT_MAX instead of INT_MIN or
> (-INT_MAX - 1). This goes back to the initial commit in the git repo for
> src/interfaces/ecpg/pgtypeslib/numeric.c. And doc/src/sgml/ecpg.sgml
> documents the min being -INT_MAX.

This sounds like an ECPG bug, not a documentation problem.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera           39°49'30"S 73°17'W  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"XML!" Exclaimed C++.  "What are you doing here? You're not a programming
language."
"Tell that to the people who use me," said XML.
https://burningbird.net/the-parable-of-the-languages/