From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgindent vs variable declaration across multiple lines |
Date: | 2023-01-20 01:43:44 |
Message-ID: | 337200.1674179024@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> There's a few places in the code that try to format a variable definition like this
> ReorderBufferChange *next_change =
> dlist_container(ReorderBufferChange, node, next);
> but pgindent turns that into
> ReorderBufferChange *next_change =
> dlist_container(ReorderBufferChange, node, next);
Yeah, that's bugged me too. I suspect that the triggering factor is
use of a typedef name within the assigned expression, but I've not
tried to run it to ground.
> I assume we'd again have to dive into pg_bsd_indent's code to fix it :(
Yeah :-(. That's enough of a rat's nest that I've not really wanted to.
But I'd support applying such a fix if someone can figure it out.
> And even if we were to figure out how, would it be worth the
> reindent-all-branches pain? I'd say yes, but...
What reindent-all-branches pain? We haven't done an all-branches
reindent in the past, even for pgindent fixes that touched far more
code than this would (assuming that the proposed fix doesn't have
other side-effects).
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-20 01:46:28 | Re: Non-superuser subscription owners |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-20 01:31:37 | pgindent vs variable declaration across multiple lines |