From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: alter_table regression test problem |
Date: | 2013-11-07 14:59:00 |
Message-ID: | 20131107145900.GA24357@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-11-07 09:55:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> writes:
> > I think it is pretty much SOP for committers to prefer a patch that
> > adds a new pair of braces around 50 lines of code and only changes
> > non-whitespace of a few lines within that block to leave the block
> > at its old indentation.
>
> Yes. It's much easier to review a patch done that way than to wonder if
> the apparently-just-whitespace changes are masking something substantive.
> In fact, if I'm reviewing a patch that reindents a big chunk of existing
> code, I'll frequently not use the patch but reconstruct it that way,
> just to be sure.
But why not just use git diff/show/whatever -w or, as suggested by
Kevin, --color-words?
ISTM the patch author is much more likely to mistake when indenting code
strangely.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-11-07 14:59:33 | Re: alter_table regression test problem |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-11-07 14:55:55 | Re: alter_table regression test problem |