Re: branching for 9.2devel - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: branching for 9.2devel
Date
Msg-id 4DB5DFC5.4010001@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: branching for 9.2devel  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: branching for 9.2devel  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: branching for 9.2devel  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: branching for 9.2devel  (Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 04/25/2011 04:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net>  writes:
>> On 04/25/2011 03:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> *Ouch*.  Really?  It's hard to believe that anyone would consider it
>>> remotely usable for more than toy-sized projects, if you have to list
>>> all the typedef names on the command line.
>> Looks like BSD does the same. It's just that we hide it in pgindent:
> Oh wow, I never noticed that.  That's going to be a severe problem for
> the "run it anywhere" goal.  The typedefs list is already close to 32K,
> and is not going anywhere but up.  There are already platforms on which
> a shell command line that long will fail, and I think once we break past
> 32K we might find it failing on even pretty popular ones.
>
>             


Well, my solution would be to replace pgindent with a perl script (among 
other advantages, it would then run everywhere we build, including 
Windows),  and filter the typedefs list so that we only use the ones 
that appear in each file with that file, instead of passing the whole 
list to each file.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yves Weißig
Date:
Subject: Re: operator classes for index?
Next
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: "stored procedures" - use cases?