Re: Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 57B1CDD0.3060401@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why --backup-and-modify-in-place in perltidy config?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/14/2016 04:38 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I did a trial run following the current pgindent README procedure, and > noticed that the perltidy step left me with a pile of '.bak' files > littering the entire tree. This seems like a pretty bad idea because > a naive "git add ." would have committed them. It's evidently because > src/tools/pgindent/perltidyrc includes --backup-and-modify-in-place. > Is there a good reason for that, and if so what is it? We should probably specify -bext='/', which would cause the backup files to be deleted unless an error occurred. Alternatively, we could just remove the in-place parameter and write a command that moved the new .tdy files over the original when perltidy was finished. > > Also, is there a reason why the perltidy invocation command hasn't > been packaged into a shell script, rather than expecting the committer > to copy-and-paste a rather large string? No idea. Sounds like a good thing to do. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: