Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres@piotr-stefaniak.me>
Date: 2017-06-16T17:44:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 01:34:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I could live with both of these proposed
> > changes, the selection of the changes you posted looks like it could be
> > improved by code changes, but that's obviously a large amount of work.
> 
> In the end, the only thing that fixes this sort of stuff is to be more
> rigid about making the code fit into 80 columns to begin with.  I get
> the impression though that a lot of people work in editor windows that
> are wider than that, so the code looks fine to them when it slops over
> a bit.

Yes, it is all about <80 column output.  The current pgindent does
everything possible to accomplish that --- the question is whether we
want uglier code to do it.

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

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +


Commits

  1. Manually un-break a few URLs that pgindent used to insist on splitting.

  2. Remove entab and associated detritus.

  3. Phase 3 of pgindent updates.

  4. Phase 2 of pgindent updates.

  5. Initial pgindent run with pg_bsd_indent version 2.0.

  6. Adjust pgindent script to use pg_bsd_indent 2.0.

  7. Final pgindent run with old pg_bsd_indent (version 1.3).