On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:09 PM, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 01:53:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> > Excerpts from David E. Wheeler's message of lun sep 27 12:25:31 -0400 2010: >> >> On Sep 27, 2010, at 5:05 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> >> >> >> > Um, no. >> >> > >> >> > In the meantime, I have arrived at the conclusion that doing this isn't >> >> > worth it because it will break all regression test output. We can fix >> >> > the stuff in our tree, but pg_regress is also used externally, and those >> >> > guys would have a nightmare with this change. Perhaps if there is >> >> > another more significant revision of the table style in the future, we >> >> > should keep this issue in mind. >> >> >> >> Or change the way pg_regress works. >> > >> > Perhaps using unaligned mode? The problem with that is that it becomes >> > very difficult to review changes to expected output. >> >> Uh, yuck! If we don't care about changing the expected output, we can >> just trim the whitespace as Peter suggested originally. > > I must be missing something pretty crucial here as far as the > complexity of changing all the regression tests. Wouldn't trimming > all trailing whitespace do the trick?
Sure. But everyone using pg_regress will have to update their regression test expected outputs. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
