Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7470.1281544124@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands
patch
Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> BTW, at least in the usage in that loop, get_functiondef_dollarquote_tag >> seems grossly overdesigned. �It would be clearer, shorter, and faster if >> you just had a strncmp test for "AS $function" there. > As far as I can see, the only purpose of that code is to support the > desire to have \sf+ display **** rather than a line number for the > lines that FOLLOW the function body. But I'm wondering if we should > just forget about that and let the numbering run continuously from the > first "AS $function" line to end of file. That would get rid of a > bunch of rather grotty code in the \sf patch, also. Oh? Considering that in the standard pg_get_functiondef output, the ending $function$ delimiter is always on the very last line, that sounds pretty useless. +1 for just numbering forward from the start line. BTW, the last I looked, \sf+ was using what I thought to be a quite ugly and poorly-considered formatting for the line number. I would suggest eight blanks for a header line and "%-7d " as the prefix format for a numbered line. The reason for making sure the prefix is 8 columns rather than some other width is to not mess up tab-based formatting of the function body. I would also prefer a lot more visual separation between the line number and the code than "%4d " will offer; and as for the stars, they're just useless and distracting. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: