Re: branching for 9.2devel

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andrew Dunstan
Тема Re: branching for 9.2devel
Дата
Msg-id 4DB5DFC5.4010001@dunslane.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: branching for 9.2devel  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы 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>)
Список 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


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Yves Weißig
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: operator classes for index?
Следующее
От: Merlin Moncure
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: "stored procedures" - use cases?