Re: Allow declaration after statement and reformat code to use it

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jelte Fennema <Jelte(dot)Fennema(at)microsoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Allow declaration after statement and reformat code to use it
Date: 2021-08-19 23:51:17
Message-ID: YR7udcZOjOiFQs55@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 10:34:04AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> C needs readability, not fewer lines.
>> Aside from horrible code, it doesn't improve 0.1% on anything.
>> I think it's a bad idea and I'm strongly against it.
>
> Same here. We have thirty-ish years worth of coding habits developed
> around the existing C90-based layout rules. I really doubt that a
> quasi-mechanical transformation is going to result in better code style.
> What it certainly will do, though, is create a pile of hazards for
> back-patching.

The back-patching hazard this could create is an argument enough to
avoid any of that IMO if done only on HEAD. When a bug is involved,
up to 7 branches may require a fix. That's already a lot of work.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jacob Champion 2021-08-20 00:05:19 Re: badly calculated width of emoji in psql
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-08-19 23:46:27 Re: elog.c query_id support vs shutdown