On 2023-06-21 We 07:35, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 2023-06-21 We 05:09, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 20.06.23 17:38, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
+1, although I wonder if we shouldn't follow pgindent's new lead
and require some argument(s).
That makes sense to me. Here is a small update with this be
On 21.06.23 13:35, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If not, part of my patch would still be useful. Maybe I should commit
my posted patch for PG16, to keep consistency with pgindent, and then
your work would presumably be considered for PG17.
That sounds like a good plan.
done
On 2023-06-21 We 05:09, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 20.06.23 17:38, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
+1, although I wonder if we shouldn't follow pgindent's new lead
and require some argument(s).
That makes sense to me. Here is a small update with this behavior
change and associated documentation updat
On 20.06.23 17:38, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
+1, although I wonder if we shouldn't follow pgindent's new lead
and require some argument(s).
That makes sense to me. Here is a small update with this behavior
change and associated documentation update.
I'm intending to add some of the new pgindent
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> I'm intending to add some of the new pgindent features to
> pgperltidy. Preparatory to that here's a rewrite of pgperltidy in perl -
> no new features yet but it does remove the hardcoded path, and requires
> you to pass in one or more files / directories as arguments.
G
On 2023-06-14 We 03:37, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 25.05.23 15:20, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
Until PG15, calling pgindent without arguments would process the whole
tree. Now you get
No files to process at ./src/tools/pgindent/pgindent line 372.
Is that intentional?
It was in
On 25.05.23 15:20, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
Until PG15, calling pgindent without arguments would process the whole
tree. Now you get
No files to process at ./src/tools/pgindent/pgindent line 372.
Is that intentional?
It was intentional, cf b16259b3c and the linked discussion.
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Until PG15, calling pgindent without arguments would process the whole
> tree. Now you get
> No files to process at ./src/tools/pgindent/pgindent line 372.
> Is that intentional?
It was intentional, cf b16259b3c and the linked discussion.
> Also, pgperltidy accepts n
> On 25 May 2023, at 11:10, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Also, pgperltidy accepts no arguments and always processes the whole tree.
> It would be nice if there were a way to process individual files or
> directories, like pgindent can.
+1, thanks! I've wanted that several times but never gotten
Until PG15, calling pgindent without arguments would process the whole
tree. Now you get
No files to process at ./src/tools/pgindent/pgindent line 372.
Is that intentional?
Also, pgperltidy accepts no arguments and always processes the whole
tree. It would be nice if there were a way to pr
10 matches
Mail list logo
