Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

> On 12 Jun 2025, at 08:27, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > The rest looks good to me. FTR this was committed last week but I missed following up here. -- Daniel Gustafsson

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On 11.06.25 11:36, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: On 5 Jun 2025, at 13:14, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 07.04.25 02:55, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: On 7 Apr 2025, at 02:43, David G. Johnston wrote: How about: + "if set to a number, overrides the default two second \\watch interval\n" I do like

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On Wednesday, June 11, 2025, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > How about the attached (reflowing rows in docs not done to keep the diff > readable)? > > WFM David J.

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

> On 5 Jun 2025, at 13:14, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On 07.04.25 02:55, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> On 7 Apr 2025, at 02:43, David G. Johnston >>> wrote: >>> How about: >>> >>> + "if set to a number, overrides the default two second \\watch >>> interval\n" >>> >>> I do like the cons

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On 05.06.25 17:57, David G. Johnston wrote: - "if set to a number" seems to indicate that something else happens if it's not a number.  But it doesn't say what.  And it's also not true. And we don't phrase things like that for other numeric settings. If not set to a number (data typ

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On 07.04.25 02:55, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: On 7 Apr 2025, at 02:43, David G. Johnston wrote: How about: + "if set to a number, overrides the default two second \\watch interval\n" I do like the consistency of "if set" even though most of the others are booleans. Ah yes, number is be

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

> On 7 Apr 2025, at 02:43, David G. Johnston wrote: > How about: > > + "if set to a number, overrides the default two second \\watch > interval\n" > > I do like the consistency of "if set" even though most of the others are > booleans. Ah yes, number is better. I'll go ahead with that in

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On Sun, Apr 6, 2025 at 2:52 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > Looking at the other variables they tend to use "if set, then" so we should > probably stick to that for this as well? Something like the below perhaps? > > HELP0(" WATCH_INTERVAL\n" > - "number of seconds \

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

> On 27 Mar 2025, at 02:42, David G. Johnston > wrote: > On second thought, something like: > > WATCH_INTERVAL: an integer number of seconds; overrides the default two > second \watch interval > > (not quite happy but it's close...keeps the 2s reference point) Looking at the other variables

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 6:34 PM David G. Johnston < david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I pondered mentioning the 2s interval but the environment variable itself > doesn't have a default, it's either set or unset which determines whether > it provides the default or not. IMO, adding this deta

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 2:11 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > On 26 Mar 2025, at 04:52, David G. Johnston > wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 8:07 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > wrote: > > > I came across the following help message added in commit 1a759c83278: >> >> + HELP0(" WATCH_INTERVAL\n" >> +

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On 26 Mar 2025, at 04:52, David G. Johnston wrote:On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 8:07 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:I came across the following help message added in commit 1a759c83278:+       HELP0("  WATCH_INTERVAL\n"+                 "    number of seconds \\watch by default wai

Re: Possibly hard-to-read message

On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 8:07 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > Hello, > > I came across the following help message added in commit 1a759c83278: > > + HELP0(" WATCH_INTERVAL\n" > + "number of seconds \\watch by default waits between > executing the query buffer\n"); > > It t