Re: Re: pgindent timing (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Refactor
NUM_cache_remove calls in error report path to a PG_TRY)
From:
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To:
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject:
Re: Re: pgindent timing (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Refactor
NUM_cache_remove calls in error report path to a PG_TRY)
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>>> Where it really bit me as when it reindented the DATA() statements
>>> that were touched by ALTER TABLE ... SET STATISTICS DISTINCT. It's
>>> not so hard to compare code, but comparing DATA() lines is the pits.
>>>
>
>
>> Oh? Maybe that's a problem we need to address more directly. I just
>> looked at what it did to the DATA lines - it seems to have changed 501
>> of them, and all the changes seem to be to do with tabbing.
>>
>
> That's interesting --- the whitespace in those macros has always been
> wildly inconsistent, so I assumed pgindent wasn't touching them at all.
> I wonder what it thinks it's doing...
>
>
>
Here's the extract attached. I replace tabs with a literal '\t' so I
could see what it was doing. I can't make much head or tail of it either.
cheers
andrew