Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-08-11T16:28:44Z
Lists: 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