Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)
От | Corey Huinker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CADkLM=f3n9FR+fV+Lt+aVOinTZwC1BiBbYTOKYLt+Gv4OCL5jw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
>> I also fear that there are corner cases where the behavior would still
>> be inconsistent. Consider
>>
>> \if ...
>> \set foo `echo \endif should not appear here`
> In this instance, ISTM that there is no problem. On "\if true", set is
> executed, all is well. On "\if false", the whole line would be skipped
> because the if-related commands are only expected on their own line, all
> is well again. No problem.
AFAICS, you misunderstood the example completely, or else you're proposing
syntax restrictions that are even more bizarre and unintelligible than
I thought before. We cannot have a situation where the syntax rules for
backslash commands inside an \if are fundamentally different from what
they are elsewhere; that's just going to lead to confusion and bug
reports.
regards, tom lane
I think Fabien was arguing that inside a false block there would be no syntax rules beyond "is the first non-space character on this line a '\' and if so is it followed with a if/elif/else/endif?". If the answer is no, skip the line. To me that seems somewhat similar to Tom's suggestion that a false branch just keeps consuming text until it encounters a \conditional or EOF.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: