Re: pgindent run - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: pgindent run
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvroSMY2Kva-kQqFB+1dCbLTGu5L9eyeSr20dv87eA4wHQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to pgindent run  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: pgindent run
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 00:29, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> Here's the diff from a pgindent run.

--- a/src/backend/commands/policy.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/policy.c
@@ -587,65 +587,65 @@ RemoveRoleFromObjectPolicy(Oid roleid, Oid
classid, Oid policy_id)
  /* If any roles remain, update the policy entry. */
  if (num_roles > 0)
  {
- /* This is the array for the new tuple */
- role_ids = construct_array(role_oids, num_roles, OIDOID,
-    sizeof(Oid), true, TYPALIGN_INT);
+ /* This is the array for the new tuple */
+ role_ids = construct_array(role_oids, num_roles, OIDOID,
+    sizeof(Oid), true, TYPALIGN_INT);

I wasn't too sure about the status of this one. Michael did mention it
in [1], but Tom mentioned that was on purpose to ease backpatching.
I'm not too clear on if Tom intended it should stay unindented until
"rewriting that whole function in a little bit".

David

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/YM0puvBnbBIZxJt2@paquier.xyz



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: What is "wraparound failure", really?
Next
From: Boris Kolpackov
Date:
Subject: Re: Pipeline mode and PQpipelineSync()