Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

I wrote:
> What I was just looking at is the possibility of absorbing struct
> tags ("xllist" in the above) as if they were typedef names. In
> at least 95% of our usages, if a struct has a tag then the tag is
> also the struct's typedef name. The reason this is interesting
> is that it looks like (on at least Linux and macOS) the debug info
> captures struct tags even when it misses the corresponding typedef.
> We could certainly create a coding rule that struct tags *must*
> match struct typedef names for our own code, but I'm not sure what
> violations of that convention might appear in system headers.

I did an experiment with seeing what would happen to the typedef list
if we included struct tags. On my Linux box, that adds about 10%
more names (3343 instead of 3028). A lot of them would be good to
have, but there are a lot of others that maybe not so much. See
attached diff output.

I hesitate to suggest any rule as grotty as "take struct tags only
if they begin with an upper-case letter", but that would actually
work really well, looks like.

regards, tom lane