Re: branching for 9.2devel

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)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