>>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>>> Do we have any reason for the restriction beyond stylistic preference?
>> No. Robert and Tom were against allowing mixing declarations and
>> code, a few more against // comments. I don't quite agree with
>> either, but getting to the rest of C99 seemed more important than
>> fighting those out at that moment.
Thomas> -1 for making superficial changes to code that we are
Thomas> "vendoring", unless it is known to be dead/abandoned and we're
Thomas> definitively forking it. It just makes it harder to track
Thomas> upstream's bug fixes and improvements, surely?
Well, the question there is how far to take that principle; do we avoid
pgindent'ing the code, do we avoid changing uint64_t etc. to uint64
etc., and so on.
(I notice that a stray uint8_t that I left behind broke the Windows
build but not the linux/bsd one, so something would have to be fixed in
the windows build in order to avoid having to change that.)
The Ryu code is perhaps an extreme example because it follows almost the
exact reverse of our coding standard.
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
