Re: pgindent bizarreness

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgindent bizarreness
Date: 2010-04-03 02:10:26
Message-ID: 4BB6A392.1000801@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Why has pgindent decided to screw up all the FD_SET calls in our code?
> See for example
> http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c.diff?r1=1.188;r2=1.189
>
>
>

This appears to be due to this on mingw:

/mingw/include/winsock.h:typedef struct fd_set FD_SET;
/mingw/include/winsock2.h:typedef struct fd_set FD_SET;

We have a list of excluded symbols in the typdef finding code, which
currently consists of this list:

'date','interval','timestamp','ANY'

Looks like we should add 'FD_SET' to this list.

I'm actually wondering if the list of excluded symbols should go in
pgindent rather than the typedef finding code. It would be a very simple
change to the pgindent script.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-04-03 08:00:17 message clarifications
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-04-03 00:39:32 Re: Compile fail, alpha5 & gcc 4.3.3 in elog.c