| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: pgindent complaint of the day | 
| Date: | 2004-10-07 14:17:08 | 
| Message-ID: | 200410071417.i97EH8f29570@candle.pha.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> If it were "the else's indent plus one more tab" it would be reasonably
> >> sane; it'd match the indentation of what comes next.
> 
> > OK, I can do that but consider:
> > [ other case ]
> 
> Just out of curiosity, what will pgindent do when re-run on the file
> with the comment already split to the next line?  My experience with
> it so far is that it will not move a comment that starts in column 1,
> but it will feel free to re-indent a comment that has some indentation.
> A reasonable goal here would be that running pgindent a second time does
> not create immediate further changes.
Right. I don't see it moving comments up on to an else line.  You are
right that if it is in the first column it will not be properly indented
so I just indent it 4 spaces before passing to BSD indent and that
works:
	
	# workaround for indent bug with 'else' handling
	# indent comment so BSD indent will move it
	        sed 's;\([}     ]\)else[        ]*\(/\*.*\)$;\1else\
	    \2;g' |
-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-07 14:33:51 | Re: Two-phase commit | 
| Previous Message | Gavin Sherry | 2004-10-07 14:07:12 | Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1 |