On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Maybe I've just got my head deeply in the sand, but I don't understand >> what the alternative to E'' supposedly is. How am I supposed to write >> the equivalent of E'\t\n\f' without using E''? The >> standard_conforming_strings syntax apparently supports no escapes of >> any kind, which seems so hideously inconvenient that I can't even >> imagine why someone wants that behavior. > > Well, quite aside from issues of compatibility with standards and other > databases, I'm sure there are lots of Windows users who are more > interested in being able to store a Windows pathname without doubling > their backslashes than they are in being able to type readable names > for ASCII control characters. After all, in most cases you can get > those characters into a string just by typing them (especially if you > aren't using readline or something like it).
Well, that's fine, but that's a long way from Peter's statement that "I think the tendency should be to get rid of E'' usage". It's only been a minor inconvenience for me to change my applications to use E'', but I certainly don't see how I could get by without it, and it's far more like other programming languages that I use (e.g. C) than the standard syntax is. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
