MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAOYmi+mrGg+n_X2MOLgeWcj3v_M00gR8uz_D7mM8z=dX1JYVbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3720B2E1-0B96-4063-8D63-B5AE6AFEA159@gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+mwzS4xfgomL1Lte+W1hRk+zahhZLnRMDJ8nYxoHUWt_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+mEU_q9sr1PMmE-4rLwFN=OjyndDwFZvpsMU3RNJLrM9g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN4CZFPwdH_GMrappThju=t4m5n95Dse6ecTNwN=h4GpZLOMng@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+m-hphbx=CRfGSdcrHi-jL3OrZGJMTAPOYp=OK253hBTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+nnYr_Oe=KH2ZW6Ld88eZWv5P-s5ZtWOEh2KsPtMqOzbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+nCg5upBVOo_UCSjMfO=YMkZXcSEsgaADKXqerr5wahZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+nRmt+K+ZVNztKFv=LuasDCCSsXLihZB6BEkVeroW8EvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN4CZFOMv=0Y1PZ8uw3xgJmEqt4D1dr1-yOq9jjZYTARZp7H9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+mLaohk3FLbH9fKGmzN7yFGHs2Zefdyp31wbL1130puiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+=Pr7AAdkcKXyLw3ycxcrjGKsOV2CTYVV2PKYQw9ecG0Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOYmi+=Pr7AAdkcKXyLw3ycxcrjGKsOV2CTYVV2PKYQw9ecG0Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2026 22:10:29 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAN4CZFOhtfezJPXAmzWwSOAR0parDxDP_vy5jUDBy1YD1S33CA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [oauth] Stabilize the libpq-oauth ABI (and allow alternative
 implementations?)
To: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
 Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAN4CZFOhtfezJPXAmzWwSOAR0parDxDP_vy5jUDBy1YD1S33CA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

1-4 looks good to me, with one question:

+#define MASK_BITS ((uintptr_t) 0x55aa55aa55aa55aa)

 Won't this cause a warning in 32 bit builds? (0x55aa55aa definitely
should work in both?)