Horton

Re: pgindent weirdness

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-04-20T21:43:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Latest consolidated typedef list from buildfarm.

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> > On 04/20/2011 04:28 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> So the list of possible additions Andrew supplied are cases where we
> >> never reference those typedefs --- seems like a cleanup opportunity.
> 
> > I think the best cleanup idea is Aidan's, namely is we have declared 
> > "typdef struct foo { ... } foo;" we should use "foo" in the code  
> > instead of "struct foo". Then the typedef will be referenced, and the 
> > code will be cleaner, and we won't run into the pgindent "struct" bug 
> > either, so it's a win/win/win.
> 
> We want to do that in any case.  I think that Bruce was suggesting going
> further and actively removing unreferenced struct tags from the
> declaration sites.  I'm less enthused about that.  It would save nothing
> except some probably-unmeasurable amount of compile time, and it'd
> result in a lot of diffs that might come back to bite future
> back-patching efforts.

No, I wasn't thinking that far;  just finding the cases where we don't
reference a typedef and instead use 'struct structname'.  I think Andrew
has supplied that list, almost.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +