Piotr Stefaniak <postg...@piotr-stefaniak.me> writes: > On 2017-06-13 22:23, Tom Lane wrote: >> I could not find any places where reverting this change made the >> results worse, so I'm unclear on why you made it.
> I must admit I'm a bit confused about why it's not fixed yet, but I'll > have to analyze that later this week. But the idea was to convince > indent that the following is not a declaration and therefore it > shouldn't be formatted as such: > typedef void (*voidptr) (int *); Hm. But that's just a function pointer typedef, and we like the formatting we're getting for those from this new version --- with or without that change. What do you think needs to be done differently? I note btw that this is not the first time we've discussed that particular bit of code in this thread. I proposed a couple of different possible changes to it before ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers