From: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Better formatting of functions in pg_dump |
Date: | 2008-07-01 11:47:26 |
Message-ID: | 486A194E.80803@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> writes:
>>> Why the random switching between newline-before and newline-after
>>> styles? Please be consistent.
>
>> I thought they were all "after". On second glance, they still seem
>> all after?
>
> Oh, my mistake, I had failed to see that the patch was getting rid of
> newline-before style in this function. I think you might have gone
> a bit overboard on adding whitespace, but the previous objection is
> nonsense, sorry.
Yeah, I like idea of moving the "metadata" stuff before the function
body, but the whitespace is a bit too much. You can fit
" LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE STRICT SECURITY DEFINER COST 100000" in
on one line without wrapping on a 80 col terminal. And we don't try to
guarantee any specific width anyway, you can get very long lines if the
function has a lot of arguments, for example.
I applied this simpler patch that just moves the "metadata" stuff before
the function body, leaving the whitespace as is (in newline-before style).
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
better-pg_dump-formatting-2.patch | text/x-diff | 1.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-07-01 11:49:47 | Re: [HACKERS] odd output in restore mode |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-07-01 10:44:22 | Re: [HACKERS] odd output in restore mode |