Re: gset updated patch
От | Karl O. Pinc |
---|---|
Тема | Re: gset updated patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1353042486.27898.3@mofo обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | gset updated patch (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: gset updated patch
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/03/2012 01:45:36 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > here is a updated patch This message does not appear to be threaded so I'm not sure I've read the whole back-history. Also, I don't really know what I'm doing. Never the less, I want to try to contribute to somebody else's patch so here's my comments. Make of them what you will. I know there's been criticism for touching too many different parts of the code, but writing your own mini-lexical analyzer does not make sense to me. There ought to be a clean way to move that into psqlscan.l and let lex do it's job. Since the result of a \gset is undefined if the query fails it makes me nervous that psql would continue running after \gset failure in a non-interactive environment. Perhaps \gset/psql should distinguish between interactive and non-interactive environments in the same way shell does? Do you have any use-cases where it makes sense to continue after error in a non-interactive environment? As long as I'm talking crazy talk, why not abandon psql as a shell language and instead make a pl/pgsql interpreter with readlne() in front of it? Solve all these language-related issues by using an actual programming language. :-) I hope at least some of the above is helpful and I'm not just injecting noise into the system. Regards, Karl <kop@meme.com> Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." -- Robert A. Heinlein
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: