Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 2023-04-22 Sa 11:37, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * I see that there's now a 20230309 release, should we consider that
>> instead?
> A test I just ran gave identical results to those from 20221112
Cool, let's use perltidy 20230309 then.
> The great advantage of not doing this alignment is that there is far
> less danger of perltidy trying to realign lines that have not in fact
> changed, because some nearby line has changed. So we'd have a good deal
> less pointless churn.
Yes, exactly.
regards, tom lane
