On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:50:48PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 05:57:41PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> > What about something like this in the root of the tree:
>> > find . -name \*.pl -o -name \*.pm | xargs perltidy -b -bl -nsfs -naws -l=100 -ole=unix
>> >
>> > There are files all over the place. The file that would most be
>> > affected with one run of this is the ECPG grammar generator.
>> >
>> > I checked the "-et=4" business (which is basically entab). We're pretty
>> > inconsistent about tabs in perl code it seems; some files use tabs
>> > others use spaces. Honestly I would just settle on what we use on C
>> > files, even if the Perl devs don't recommend it "because of
>> > maintainability and portability". I mean if it works well for us for C
>> > code, why would it be a problem in Perl code? However, I don't write
>> > much of that Perl code myself.
>>
>> +1 for formatting all our Perl scripts and for including -et=4. Since that
>> will rewrite currently-tidy files anyway, this is a good time to audit our
>> perltidy settings.
>
> OK, another open question is whether we should do any of these changes
> now for 9.2/9.3 or wait for 9.3/9.4?
I don't think it matters very much - very few commits touch those perl
scripts. If we have a consensus, I think it's fine to do it now, or
even after we branch.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
