[tz] Compiler warning in tzcode2016g about SIZE_MAX being wider than int

[Paul Eggert]

On 10/20/2016 10:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Or in other words, clang is pointing out, quite correctly, that SIZE_MAX
> won't fit in an int.  This doesn't represent a runtime bug

Yes, it's a false alarm. I often get false alarms like that when using 
Clang. I've been too lazy to report them to the Clang maintainers, but 
perhaps you can find the energy....

> I am not aware of any C implementation that
> has ever had INT_MAX > SIZE_MAX, and surely there are none in use today.

The test is there partly because the code attempts to be as portable as 
possible, and partly because the code shouldn't limit the number of 
zones etc. to INT_MAX and this test is a placeholder for fixing that 
problem later. Generally speaking in C, object sizes should be limited 
only by min(PTRDIFF_MAX, SIZE_MAX).

I'll see if I can rewrite the code to remove the INT_MAX restriction, 
which is arbitrary here. Not sure whether this will pacify Clang, but 
it's really a Clang bug so this is low priority.