Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pgindent run for 9.4
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pgindent run for 9.4 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140506221958.GL30817@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pgindent run for 9.4 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pgindent run for 9.4
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 05:35:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Ah, found it. There is an excludes pattern file list I had forgotten > > about; it has: > > > /s_lock\.h$ > > /ecpg/test/expected/ > > /snowball/libstemmer/ > > /ecpg/include/(sqlda|sqltypes)\.h$ > > /ecpg/include/preproc/struct\.h$ > > /pl/plperl/ppport\.h$ > > Ah, so you've been excluding some of the ecpg/include/ header files but > not sqlca.h. > > > I am thinking I should back out the tab/comment changes in those files > > in the back branches, though I would then need to adjust the ecpg > > regression tests. In practice, these files are rarely patched, so it > > might be fine to just leave them alone. > > No, let's not back them out. The real question here is why sqlca.h is > treated differently from those other three. At least in HEAD, I'd be > inclined to pgindent all of ecpg/include/ and just deal with any ensuing > test fallout. As long as updating the expected files is part of your > pgindent procedure, why not? > > IOW, I get the reasons for those other exclusions: > > s_lock.h: lots of inline ASM which pgindent doesn't deal well with > /snowball/libstemmer/: upstream code not maintained by us > ppport.h: ditto > > But I don't see the reason why we shouldn't expect ecpg's headers to > conform to our layout rules. I don't know who ecpg got in there. Let me know what you would like done. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: