Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-03-24 13:25:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (2) "abs", "boolean", "iterator", "other", "pointer", "reference",
>> "string", and "type" all now are listed as typedef names.
>>
>> It's probably okay to treat "boolean" as a typedef, but all those others
>> are complete disasters. Anyone know where they're coming from?
> Semi informed theory: LLVM? I think I'd configured one of the LLVM
> animals to collect typedefs, but that might have been a bad idea...
That was my first thought as well, since this seems to have changed
quite recently. I don't think it's a bad idea to be collecting typedefs
from something that compiles that code, because otherwise our own
typedefs in that area won't be known.
>> As for "bool", we could probably deal with that most reliably by
>> having pgindent add it as a special case. Maybe we could get it
>> back in there by having some trailing-edge buildfarm member
>> contribute typedefs, but that seems like a solution with a rather
>> limited half-life.
> Could we combine the list of typedefs with one manually maintained
> in-tree?
Perhaps. We might need a manually maintained blacklist, as well.
regards, tom lane
