Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > > Being at least one of the persons having mentioned astyle to Alvaro, I > > had tested that once and I thought the results were resembling something > > reasonable after an hour of fiddling or so. But there were certain > > things that I could not be make it do during that. The only thing I > > remember now was reducing the indentation of parameters to the left if > > the line length got to long. Now, I personally think that's an > > anti-feature, but I am not sure if others think differently. > > I never particularly cared for that behavior either. It probably made > sense back in the video-terminal days, when your view of a program was > 80 columns period.
I've never liked that either; I am a fan of keeping things to 80 columns, but when things get longer I prefer my editor to wrap them to the next line without the silly de-indent (or not wrap, if I tell it not to.) Another benefit of more modern tools is that there's no need for a typedef file, which is great when you're trying to indent after a patch which adds some more typedefs that are not listed in the file. > These days I think most people can use a wider > window at need --- not that I want to adopt wider lines as standard, but > the readability tradeoff between not having lines wrap versus messing up > the indentation seems like it's probably different now. Agreed. I would be sad if we adopted a policy of sloppiness on width. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers