From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgindent vs. pgperltidy command-line arguments |
Date: | 2023-06-14 07:37:45 |
Message-ID: | c6eaa74b-0ccf-8d6c-6d63-87c3a88c2e99@eisentraut.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25.05.23 15:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>> Until PG15, calling pgindent without arguments would process the whole
>> tree. Now you get
>> No files to process at ./src/tools/pgindent/pgindent line 372.
>> Is that intentional?
>
> It was intentional, cf b16259b3c and the linked discussion.
>
>> Also, pgperltidy accepts no arguments and always processes the whole
>> tree. It would be nice if there were a way to process individual files
>> or directories, like pgindent can.
>
> +1, although I wonder if we shouldn't follow pgindent's new lead
> and require some argument(s).
That makes sense to me. Here is a small update with this behavior
change and associated documentation update.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-0001-Allow-and-require-passing-files-on-command-line-o.patch | text/plain | 3.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Richard Guo | 2023-06-14 07:38:10 | Re: Replace (GUC_UNIT_MEMORY | GUC_UNIT_TIME) with GUC_UNIT in guc.c |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-06-14 07:16:50 | Re: pg_waldump: add test for coverage |