On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:50:48PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 05:57:41PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> > What about something like this in the root of the tree: >> > find . -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm | xargs perltidy -b -bl -nsfs -naws >> > -l=100 -ole=unix >> > >> > There are files all over the place. The file that would most be >> > affected with one run of this is the ECPG grammar generator. >> > >> > I checked the "-et=4" business (which is basically entab). We're pretty >> > inconsistent about tabs in perl code it seems; some files use tabs >> > others use spaces. Honestly I would just settle on what we use on C >> > files, even if the Perl devs don't recommend it "because of >> > maintainability and portability". I mean if it works well for us for C >> > code, why would it be a problem in Perl code? However, I don't write >> > much of that Perl code myself. >> >> +1 for formatting all our Perl scripts and for including -et=4. Since that >> will rewrite currently-tidy files anyway, this is a good time to audit our >> perltidy settings. > > OK, another open question is whether we should do any of these changes > now for 9.2/9.3 or wait for 9.3/9.4?
I don't think it matters very much - very few commits touch those perl scripts. If we have a consensus, I think it's fine to do it now, or even after we branch. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
