Re: Order getopt arguments
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-12-05T16:51:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > I was only talking about the actual argument to getopt(), not the > order of the code stanzas. I'm not sure what we ought to do about the > latter. 100% agreed that the getopt argument should just be alphabetical. But the bulk of Peter's patch is rearranging switch cases to agree with that, and if you want to do that then you have to also think about long options, which are not in the getopt argument. I'm not entirely convinced that reordering the switch cases is worth troubling over. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Order getopt arguments
- df8b8968d409 16.0 landed