Re: branching for 9.2devel

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 04/25/2011 07:48 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, -Ttypedef is wrong on its face.  Right would be a switch
>> specifying the name of the file to read the typedef list from.
>> Then you don't need massive script-level infrastructure to try
>> to spoonfeed that data to the program doing the work.

> Ok, but that would account for about 5 lines of the current 400 or so in 
> pgindent, and we'd have to extend our patch of BSD indent to do it. 

Huh?  I thought the context here was reimplementing it from scratch in
perl.

> That's not to say that we shouldn't, but we should be aware of how much 
> it will buy us on its own.

The point isn't so much to remove a few lines of shell code (though I
think that's a bigger deal than you say, if we want this to be usable on
Windows).  It's to not run into shell line length limits, which I
believe we are dangerously close to already on many platforms.
        regards, tom lane