Thread

  1. Re: Proposal: new border setting in psql

    D'Arcy Cain <darcy@druid.net> — 2008-08-24T06:00:20Z

    On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:57:50 -0400
    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
    > Also, having now looked at the proposed patch, it seems clear that it
    > isn't addressing the issue of quoting/escaping at all; so I wonder how
    > this can be considered to be a safely machine-readable format.
    
    It's not a machine readable format.  It is a simple display with more
    border lines.  Just like "border 2" is like "border 1" with more border
    lines.  I'm just following the progression.
    
    > In particular, the output seems to me to not even approximate the rules
    > laid down at
    > http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickref.html
    
    And there is no reason that it should.
    
    > So, quite aside from the question of whether we care to support ReST,
    > my opinion is that this patch fails to do so, and a significantly more
    > invasive patch would be needed to do it.
    
    I suppose it is my fault for mentioning ReST.  That was the reason I
    looked into this but that is not what the final proposal is.  I too
    would argue against making a munged output just to match one formatting
    scheme.  If I do a query and I need to modify it manually when I use it
    in *any* third party program that's my personal issue.  If "border 3"
    happens to get me closer to my format that's great but it has to stand
    on its own merit.  I think that this proopsal does.
    
    -- 
    D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net>         |  Democracy is three wolves
    http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
    +1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.