Christoph Berg wrote: > But do we really want to choose > something different just because MySQL is using it?
Advertising
That's not what I meant. If mysql wasn't using \G I'd still suggest the name \gx because: - it means the functionality of \g combined with \x so semantically it makes sense. - there is no precedent in psql that the upper-case version of a meta-command as a variant of the lower-case version: \C has nothing to do with \c, and \H nothing with \h, and \T and \t are equally disconnected - there hasn't been much use up to now of uppercase meta-commands, C,T and H are the only ones I see in \? \d[something] is crowded with lots of "something", whereas \D is not used at all. The pattern seems to be that uppercase is the exception. FWIW I don't share the feeling that \G is easier to remember or type than \gx. > \G will be much easier to explain to existing users (both people > coming from MySQL to PostgreSQL, and PostgreSQL users doing a detour > into foreign territory), and it would be one difference less to have > to care about when typing on the CLIs. That's a good argument, but if it's pitted against psql's consistency with itself, I'd expect the latter to win. Best regards, -- Daniel Vérité PostgreSQL-powered mailer: http://www.manitou-mail.org Twitter: @DanielVerite -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
