Horton

Re: pgindent && weirdness

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres@piotr-stefaniak.me>
Date: 2020-02-17T23:42:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Another problem is that there is one thing in our tree that looks like
> a non-cast under the new rule, but it actually expands to a type name,
> so now we get that wrong!  (I mean, unpatched indent doesn't really
> understand it either, it thinks it's a cast, but at least it knows the
> following * is not a binary operator):

> -       STACK_OF(X509_NAME) *root_cert_list = NULL;
> +       STACK_OF(X509_NAME) * root_cert_list = NULL;

> That's a macro from an OpenSSL header.  Not sure what to do about that.

If we get that wrong, but a hundred other places look better,
I'm not too fussed about it.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Run pgindent with new pg_bsd_indent version 2.1.1.

  2. Final pgindent run with pg_bsd_indent version 2.1.