On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:13 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 1:53 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> I think the point here is that if you start with an arbitrary > >> non-negative shift value, the preceding loop may in fact decrement it > >> down to something less than zero before exiting, in which case we > >> would indeed have trouble. I suspect that the code is making > >> undocumented assumptions about the possible initial values of shift. > >> Maybe some Asserts would be good? Also, if we're effectively assuming > >> that shift must be exactly zero here, why not let the compiler > >> hard-code that? > > > Sounds like a good solution. I've attached the patch for that. > > Personally I'd put the Assert immediately after the loop, because > it's not related to the "Reserve slot for the value" comment. > Seems reasonable otherwise. >
Thanks. Pushed the fix after moving the Assert. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
