Re: A thought: should we run pgindent now?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A thought: should we run pgindent now?
Date: 2010-02-18 15:13:45
Message-ID: 20100218151345.GC6317@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >
> >>Doesn't that require that all pgindent runs produce the same output?
> >>Which they generally don't due to different sets of typedefs and
> >>stuff? It's a solvable problem of course, but not quite as simple as
> >>you make it sound :-)
> >
> >The typedef file emitted by the buildfarm is supposed to be rather
> >static, no?
>
> Umm, static in what sense? Clearly if we add things to the code that
> can involve extra typedefs being found. The buildfarm's list is the
> union of all the typedefs found by the contributing members at the
> time they do their runs.

Yeah, but most typedefs are already there; I mean we're not likely to
change even 5% of the current list.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2010-02-18 15:25:57 SR: "pseudo replication database of the primary" ...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-02-18 15:11:29 Re: A thought: should we run pgindent now?