A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-May/099956.html below:

[Python-Dev] Did I miss the decision to untabify all of the C code?

[Python-Dev] Did I miss the decision to untabify all of the C code? [Python-Dev] Did I miss the decision to untabify all of the C code?Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Thu May 6 02:51:20 CEST 2010
Eric Smith <eric <at> trueblade.com> writes:
> 
> Last I saw Antoine had written a script that might do what we want, but 
> hadn't been thoroughly tested. Now I've seen a few checkins for files 
> that have been run through the script.

As far as I'm concerned, it was a case of eating my own dog food: running the
script over a couple of files I'm interested in (_ssl.c, _fileio.c). I believe
Victor processed posixmodule.c for the same reasons.

> What gives? And why do this so close to 2.7? I don't think it will cause 
> any problems, but it's hard to review commits to ensure they have no 
> changes when there's a rush of large commits near a release.

Well, however soon or late we do this, good luck reviewing multi-thousand line
commits to check no mistake sneaked in :)
By construction, these commits only adjust whitespace in some C files, which
means the risk of breakage is very close to zero.
(I guess you could do a "svn diff -x -w" between each two revisions to expose
any potential non-whitespace changes)

Really

Antoine.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4