On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2013-11-07 10:10:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> > On 2013-11-07 06:49:58 -0800, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> >> It's up to the committer whether to indent >> >> after review and make both substantive and whitespace changes >> >> together, but I have definitely seen those done separately, or even >> >> left for the next global pgindent run to fix. >> >> > Hm. I don't remember many such cases and I've just looked across the git >> > history and i didn't really find anything after >> > a04161f2eab55f72b3c3dba9baed0ec09e7f633f, but that was back when >> > individuals couldn't run pgindent because of the typedefs file. >> >> FWIW, I tend to pgindent before committing, now that it's easy to do so. >> But in cases like this, I'd much rather review the patch *before* that >> happens. Basically the point of the review is to follow and confirm >> the patch author's thought process, and I'll bet you put the braces in >> before reindenting too. > > Well, I did both at the same time, I have an emacs command for that > ;). But independent from that technicality, reindenting is part of > changing the flow of logic for me - I've spent a couple of years > primarily writing python (where indentation is significant), maybe it's > that. > > So, here's the patch (slightly editorialized) with reverted indenting of > that block.
Gah. Well, of course, I have the opposite preference from Tom on how this should be indented. Sigh. -- 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
