| From: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: pgindent run next week? |
| Date: | 2019-05-22 21:16:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAHE3wgh3VgMXTzJR-47=PjjOX-084ewMf23D30QQtAVzs0bL9w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em qua, 22 de mai de 2019 às 14:08, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> escreveu:
>
> I wrote:
> > Hearing no objections, I'll plan on running pgindent tomorrow sometime.
>
> And done.
>
> > The new underlying pg_bsd_indent (2.1) is available now from
> > https://git.postgresql.org/git/pg_bsd_indent.git
>
> Please update your local copy if you have one.
>
I give it a try in a fork of PostgreSQL 10. The difference between v10
and my fork is not huge. The stats are 56 files changed, 2240
insertions(+), 203 deletions(-) and patch size is 139 Kb. I have
conflicts in 3 of 19 .h files and 1 of 25 .c files. Like Mark, I don't
have a strong preference, however, re-indent files would reduce
developer time while preparing patches to back branches.
--
Euler Taveira Timbira -
http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-05-22 21:25:31 | Re: Remove useless associativity/precedence from parsers |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2019-05-22 21:07:06 | Re: Is it safe to ignore the return value of SPI_finish and SPI_execute? |