| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| 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 14:48:31 |
| Message-ID: | 4B7D533F.20601@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pierre C | 2010-02-18 14:58:25 | Re: Avoiding bad prepared-statement plans. |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-02-18 14:21:25 | Re: A thought: should we run pgindent now? |