Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan writes:
> > I've committed a fix to pgindent for this. Do we want to rerun pgindent
> > for these files?:
>
> I think the plan is to redo pgindent near the end of beta. There's
> probably no need to do it right now.
Sure, sounds like a plan.
--
Bruce Momjia
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >> Why has pgindent decided to screw up all the FD_SET calls in our code?
> >> See for example
> >> http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c.diff?r1=1.188;r2=1.189
> >>
> >
> >
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> I've committed a fix to pgindent for this. Do we want to rerun pgindent
> for these files?:
I think the plan is to redo pgindent near the end of beta. There's
probably no need to do it right now.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mai
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Why has pgindent decided to screw up all the FD_SET calls in our code?
See for example
http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c.diff?r1=1.188;r2=1.189
Because the typedef list supplied by Andrew includes FD_SE
Tom Lane wrote:
> Why has pgindent decided to screw up all the FD_SET calls in our code?
> See for example
> http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c.diff?r1=1.188;r2=1.189
Because the typedef list supplied by Andrew includes FD_SET as a
typedef. :-O See src
Tom Lane wrote:
Why has pgindent decided to screw up all the FD_SET calls in our code?
See for example
http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c.diff?r1=1.188;r2=1.189
This appears to be due to this on mingw:
/mingw/include
Why has pgindent decided to screw up all the FD_SET calls in our code?
See for example
http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/backend/postmaster/pgstat.c.diff?r1=1.188;r2=1.189
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.
