Re: perltidy version - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: perltidy version
Date
Msg-id 9B86EB7D-6FE0-470F-B0CA-8A56161B8035@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: perltidy version  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> On 04 Mar 2018, at 00:03, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> Ah yeah, if I apply that one first, the diff from using 20140328 is much
>> smaller. Attached is that one, which means the difference between the two
>> perltidy versions.
>
> I'm hardly a Perl guru, so I'm not going to opine on whether these
> changes are for the better or worse.  They're definitely not very
> extensive, though.  If the folks here who do hack Perl a lot think
> the 20140328 output is better, I'm fine with switching.

The 20140328 format is, IMHO, better in enough ways that I’d recommend
switching.  The fact that it makes download for users, and documentation
writing for the project, easier is another good thing.  +1 for going ti
20140328.

cheers ./daniel



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: perltidy version
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] user-defined numeric data types triggering ERROR: unsupported type