On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 03:25, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > > > On 07/06/2011 08:26 PM, Brar Piening wrote: >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Review of VS 2010 support patches >> From: Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> >> To: Brar Piening <b...@gmx.de> >> Date: 06.07.2011 22:58 >> >>>> I'll remove my versions from the patch (v9 probably) if those files get >>>> commited. >>>> >>> >>> >>> I'm just doing some final testing and preparing to commit the new pgflex >>> and pgbison. >> >> >> The attached patch includes documentation changes and excludes my versions >> of pgbison.pl and pgflex.pl which have been replaced by Andrews' versions >> that are already commited. >> >> As before "perltidy_before.patch" has to be applied first and >> "VS2010v9.patch" second. >> >> > > I just started looking at this a bit. One small question: why are we using > "use base qw(foo);" instead of "use parent qw(foo);" which I understand is > preferred these days?
I am no perl expert, but I see we are using this already today - in code written by you in one case ;) I'd assume it was just following the same standard... If the other way is the way to do it today, I see no reason not to change it to use that. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
