Thread
Commits
-
Fix duplicate words in comments
- 7111e332c57d 15.0 landed
-
Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org> — 2021-10-04T12:56:23Z
Hi hackers, I noticed a duplicate-word typo in a comments recently, and cooked up the following ripgrep command to find some more. rg --multiline --pcre2 --type=c '(?<!struct )(?<!union )\b((?!long\b|endif\b|that\b)\w+)\s+(^\s*[*#]\s*)?\b\1\b' PFA a patch with the result of that. - ilmari
-
Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> — 2021-10-04T13:15:29Z
> On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org> wrote: > I noticed a duplicate-word typo in a comments recently, and cooked up > the following ripgrep command to find some more. Pushed to master, thanks! I avoided the reflow of the comments though to make it the minimal change. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
-
Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org> — 2021-10-04T13:30:53Z
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes: >> On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org> wrote: > >> I noticed a duplicate-word typo in a comments recently, and cooked up >> the following ripgrep command to find some more. > > Pushed to master, thanks! Thanks! > I avoided the reflow of the comments though to make it the minimal > change. Fair enough. I wasn't sure myself whether to do it or not. - ilmari
-
Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-10-04T13:56:53Z
=?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org> writes: > Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes: >> I avoided the reflow of the comments though to make it the minimal >> change. > Fair enough. I wasn't sure myself whether to do it or not. The next pgindent run will do it anyway (except in comment blocks starting in column 1). I used to think it was better to go ahead and manually reflow, if you use an editor that makes that easy. That way there are fewer commits touching any one line of code, which is good when trying to review code history. However, now that we've got the ability to make "git blame" ignore pgindent commits, maybe it's better to leave that sort of mechanical cleanup to pgindent, so that the substantive patch is easier to review. (But I'm not sure how well the ignore-these-commits behavior actually works for cases like this.) regards, tom lane
-
Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> — 2021-10-04T19:19:50Z
> On 4 Oct 2021, at 15:56, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I used to think it was better to go ahead and manually reflow, if you > use an editor that makes that easy. That way there are fewer commits > touching any one line of code, which is good when trying to review > code history. However, now that we've got the ability to make "git > blame" ignore pgindent commits, maybe it's better to leave that sort > of mechanical cleanup to pgindent, so that the substantive patch is > easier to review. Yeah, that's precisely why I did it. Since we can skip over pgindent sweeps it makes sense to try and minimize such changes to make code archaeology easier. There are of course cases when the result will be such an eyesore that we'd prefer to have it done sooner, but in cases like these where line just got one word shorter it seemed an easy choice. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
-
Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2021-10-04T19:54:00Z
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes: >> On 4 Oct 2021, at 15:56, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I used to think it was better to go ahead and manually reflow, if you >> use an editor that makes that easy. That way there are fewer commits >> touching any one line of code, which is good when trying to review >> code history. However, now that we've got the ability to make "git >> blame" ignore pgindent commits, maybe it's better to leave that sort >> of mechanical cleanup to pgindent, so that the substantive patch is >> easier to review. > Yeah, that's precisely why I did it. Since we can skip over pgindent sweeps it > makes sense to try and minimize such changes to make code archaeology easier. > There are of course cases when the result will be such an eyesore that we'd > prefer to have it done sooner, but in cases like these where line just got one > word shorter it seemed an easy choice. Actually though, there's another consideration: if you leave not-correctly-pgindented code laying around, it causes problems for the next hacker who modifies that file and wishes to neaten up their own work by pgindenting it. They can either tediously reverse out part of the delta, or commit a patch that includes entirely-unrelated cosmetic changes, neither of which is pleasant. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Duplicat-word typos in code comments
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> — 2021-10-05T08:53:12Z
> On 4 Oct 2021, at 21:54, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes: >>> On 4 Oct 2021, at 15:56, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> I used to think it was better to go ahead and manually reflow, if you >>> use an editor that makes that easy. That way there are fewer commits >>> touching any one line of code, which is good when trying to review >>> code history. However, now that we've got the ability to make "git >>> blame" ignore pgindent commits, maybe it's better to leave that sort >>> of mechanical cleanup to pgindent, so that the substantive patch is >>> easier to review. > >> Yeah, that's precisely why I did it. Since we can skip over pgindent sweeps it >> makes sense to try and minimize such changes to make code archaeology easier. >> There are of course cases when the result will be such an eyesore that we'd >> prefer to have it done sooner, but in cases like these where line just got one >> word shorter it seemed an easy choice. > > Actually though, there's another consideration: if you leave > not-correctly-pgindented code laying around, it causes problems > for the next hacker who modifies that file and wishes to neaten > up their own work by pgindenting it. They can either tediously > reverse out part of the delta, or commit a patch that includes > entirely-unrelated cosmetic changes, neither of which is > pleasant. Right, this is mainly targeting comments where changing a word on the first line in an N line long comment can have the knock-on effect of changing N-1 lines just due to reflowing. This is analogous to wrapping existing code in a new block, causing a re-indentation to happen, except that for comments it can sometimes be Ok to leave (as in this particular case). At the end of the day, it's all a case-by-case basis trade-off call. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/