"Sergey E. Koposov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But concerning to your zero byte change, it currently just broke > everything (as I thought, and that's why I didn't implemented it). The > problem with using zero byte is that it breaks all the readline functions > read_history and write_history. Those functions deal with usual C > strings, so putting zero byte inside them will just truncate everything. > (that's exactly what occur with the psql from CVS).
If CVS tip is actually broken, we'd better revert this patch and rethink the approach. > So, I don't know. There are two alternatives. One is to use 0x01 byte > instead: (at least I don't really agree with Tom's comments about possible > problems with using 0x01 with some exotic encodings) Just because you don't use far eastern encodings doesn't mean there's not a large contingent who do. I don't understand why any of these shenanigans are needed. If \e is able to stick a multiline entry into the history, why can't the other code do it? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster