From: =?utf-8?Q?Dagfinn_Ilmari_Manns=C3=A5ker?= <ilmari@ilmari.org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>,  Andrew Dunstan
 <andrew@dunslane.net>,  pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: perlcritic: prohibit map and grep in void conext
References: <87fsvzhhc4.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
	<8aa32735-a310-e5b9-cdd4-1282b72ae8f3@dunslane.net>
	<8B793436-CB3B-469F-9034-DED161BB96B8@yesql.se>
	<YSiBz4jYfURTui3u@paquier.xyz>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 11:32:30 +0100
In-Reply-To: <YSiBz4jYfURTui3u@paquier.xyz> (Michael Paquier's message of
	"Fri, 27 Aug 2021 15:10:23 +0900")
Message-ID: <87mtp3uqip.fsf@wibble.ilmari.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87mtp3uqip.fsf%40wibble.ilmari.org>
Precedence: bulk

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 01:26:23PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> I'm fine with increasing this policy, but I don't have strong feelings.  If we
>> feel the perlcritic policy change is too much, I would still prefer to go ahead
>> with the map rewrite part of the patch though.
>
> I have no issue either about the rewrite part of the patch, so I'd
> tend to just do this part and move on.  Daniel, would you like to
> apply that?

Why the resistance to the perlcritic part?  That one case is the only
violation in the tree today, and it's a pattern we don't want to let
back in (I will surely object every time I see it when reviewing
patches), so why not automate it?

- ilmari