Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> I think the current logic is pretty horrible, primarily because it's so
> hard to get to manually.
Yes, I think that's really the big argument against it: no editor on
the face of the planet will indent code that way to start with.
> I could live with both of these proposed
> changes, the selection of the changes you posted looks like it could be
> improved by code changes, but that's obviously a large amount of work.
In the end, the only thing that fixes this sort of stuff is to be more
rigid about making the code fit into 80 columns to begin with. I get
the impression though that a lot of people work in editor windows that
are wider than that, so the code looks fine to them when it slops over
a bit.
> At this point however I wonder whether just moving to the new tool on
> its own wouldn't be a big enough change - we could just delay that
> decision until we've got the rest done at least.
I'm torn between that approach and "let's just have one big flag day
and get it over with". I think having the rules incrementally changing
from one release to the next will be a huge headache.
I do intend to apply the diffs to HEAD in multiple steps, just to
make them more reviewable. But I think we should probably absorb
all the changes we want into v10, not leave some for later cycles.
regards, tom lane