Re: About pgAdmin III

Dave Page wrote:

>Hi Andreas,
>
>It's rumoured that Andreas Pflug once said:
>
>
>>I strongly disagree for several reasons.
>>
>>IMHO the dialog can be resized large enough for view and function
>>editing, it's not so much space that's wasted compared to an edit only
>>window. If this is still felt too small, the function/view definition
>>exceeds the scope of the property dialog; use a script edited with the
>>query tool instead. Property dialogs are for ad-hoc work, not lengthy
>>development.
>>
>>
>
>So what you're saying is, if you want to develop complex views/functions,
>don't use the nice tools we provide, do it the hard way? If so, then
>you've completely missed the whole point of the pgAdmin project :-(
>
What I say is that if view or function gets big, the wizard features
become minor. I use the property dialog to create a skeleton, and fill
it later in plain sql. The reengineered sql makes it quite easy...

>You should be able to edit any object through it's properties dialogue, no
>matter how complex - you cannot start dismissing them because they become
>too big - that's just ridiculous!!
>
Even a swiss army knife has more than one blade: different sizes for
different objects.

>The properties dialogues should all be a consistent size and shape (iirc,
>you wrote some notes to this effect), and if more edit real estate is
>required, then a popup editor seems the only sensible option - it's even
>been on the pgAdmin II todo list for a year or more.
>
So how big do you need the editing window?
I just checked under win32, I got 153x35 chars on the screen when
maximizing the function dialog, and 156x47 in the view definition, on a
1152x864 screen. Is this really too small? Then I'd advise to use a
4096x3072 screen, and a 4pt font....

I certainly won't agree to screw up the window handling for getting some
percent more usable screen size.

Regards,
Andreas