Re: parens cleanup

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: parens cleanup
Date: 2020-01-30 02:27:11
Message-ID: 20200130022711.GB1956@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 04:47:19PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> 0002 removes newlines immediately following parens. These were
>> previously useful because pgindent would move arguments further to the
>> left so that the line would fit under 80 chars. However, pgindent no
>> longer does that, so the newlines are pointless and ugly.
>
> +1 except for the changes in zic.c. Those line breaks are following
> the upstream code, so I'd just put them back in the next merge ...

+1.

>> These being cosmetic cleanups, they're not intended for backpatch,
>> though an argument could be made that doing that would save some future
>> backpatching pain. If there are sufficient votes for that, I'm open to
>> doing it. (Of course, 0002 would not be backpatched further back than
>> pg10, the first release that uses the "new" pgindent rules.)
>
> Meh, -0.1 or so on back-patching.

I am not sure that this is worth a back-patch.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-01-30 02:47:51 Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-01-30 02:19:29 Re: Physical replication slot advance is not persistent