On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > > This particular bike-shedding really doesn't seem to be terribly useful > > or sensible, to me. \gx isn't "consistent" or "descriptive", frankly. > > Why not? To me it reads as "\g with an x option". The "x" refers to > the implied "\x", so it's not an arbitrary choice at all. > > The main problem I see with \G is that it's a dead end. If somebody > comes along next year and says "I'd like a variant of \g with some other > frammish", what will we do? There are no more case variants to use. > > In short, really the direction this ought to go in is \g[options] [file] > which is perfectly consistent with precedents in psql such as \d. > But there isn't any place where we've decided that upper case means > a variant of a lower case command. > +1
