| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: multibyte charater set in levenshtein function |
| Date: | 2010-07-21 21:34:16 |
| Message-ID: | 1279747905-sup-6308@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jul 21 14:25:47 -0400 2010:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:54 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Same benefit can be achived by replacing char * with
> > char * and length.
> > I changed !m to m == 0 because Itagaki asked me to make it conforming coding
> > style. Do you think there is no reason to fix coding style in existing
> > code?
>
> Yeah, we usually try to avoid changing that sort of thing in existing
> code, unless there's a very good reason.
I think fixing a stylistic issue in code that's being edited for other
purposes is fine, and a good idea going forward. We wouldn't commit a
patch that would *only* fix those, because that would cause a problem
for backpatches for no benefit, but if the patch touches something else,
then a backpatch of another patch is going to need manual intervention
anyway.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-07-21 21:38:06 | Re: git config user.email |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-07-21 21:30:57 | Re: documentation for committing with git |