David Fetter wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 07:20:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Did we ever get tab completion support for these backslash commands?
Nope :/
Not sure if I'll be able to get to it this week, either.
What is the TODO description then?
--
Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 07:20:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Did we ever get tab completion support for these backslash commands?
Nope :/
Not sure if I'll be able to get to it this week, either.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter da...@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778
Did we ever get tab completion support for these backslash commands?
---
David Fetter wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:42:31PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
Is this any better?
So what
David Fetter wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:42:31PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
It also seems like we're missing tab completion support for this.
Oops. Working on that now.
Any luck with this?
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 10:39:33AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:42:31PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
It also seems like we're missing tab completion support for this.
Oops. Working on that now.
Any luck with this?
I have a handle on
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
I have a handle on the problem, which is that the tab completion code
assumes, wrongly, that it only needs to deal with fixed strings. It's
actually been false for some time in the \div case, for example. The
S option has shattered the fixed-string
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:11:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
I have a handle on the problem, which is that the tab completion
code assumes, wrongly, that it only needs to deal with fixed
strings. It's actually been false for some time in the \div case,
David Fetter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:11:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It seems like rather a large change to be making in beta. Can you
make a small patch that fixes the immediate problem, and leave the
refactoring for 8.5?
The hack I've come up with short of the refactor is to
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:31:11PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:11:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It seems like rather a large change to be making in beta. Can
you make a small patch that fixes the immediate problem, and
leave the
David Fetter wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 01:31:11PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tab completion has never been perfect. I don't think beta is the
best time to be improving it so much. I think a small patch that
just adds \dfa, \dfw and appropriate pattern completions (i.e.
it lists
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 01:26:33PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
[...]
I merged the entries into one line:
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list (only agg/normal/trigger/window) functions
I didn't feel I had room
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 08:32:20AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
[...]
True, but the problem is that the brackets don't correspond [...]
Yes, right. Still, square brackets seem (to me) to provide some visual
cue. But I admit that this is already
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 08:32:20AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
[...]
True, but the problem is that the brackets don't correspond [...]
Yes, right. Still, square brackets seem (to me) to provide some visual
cue.
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
If I can get someone else to say they prefer brackets over parentheses in
\? I will make the change. Right now we have:
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list (only agg/normal/trigger/window) functions
With brackets it would be:
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN]
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes:
If I can get someone else to say they prefer brackets over parentheses in
\? I will make the change. Right now we have:
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list (only agg/normal/trigger/window) functions
With brackets it would be:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Still, my original proposal was \df[antw][S+]. The extra brackets are
obviously redundant, but if we're about providing cues, this is a good
cue IMO. It allows the [S+] to match the other lines.
I'm for that too. Bruce was complaining that
Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Still, my original proposal was \df[antw][S+]. The extra brackets are
obviously redundant, but if we're about providing cues, this is a good
cue IMO. It allows the [S+] to match the other lines.
I'm for that too. Bruce
David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 08:54:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
I think it's good to have them translatable. As for using aggregate
instead of agg I don't think it's that great an idea. If you need
to
notify translators that agg
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list only agg/normal/trigger/window functions
Shouldn't that second line have some curly braces? Like maybe:
\df{antw}[S+] [PATTERN] list only agg/normal/trigger/window functions
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list only agg/normal/trigger/window functions
Shouldn't that second line have some curly braces? Like maybe:
\df{antw}[S+] [PATTERN] list only
On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 12:19 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I suggested this to Bruce over IM:
\df[antw][S+] list [only agg/normal/trigger/window] functions
(one line only, removing the second redundant line). This seems
clea[nr]er to me. Bruce says it would confuse users. But really,
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list only agg/normal/trigger/window functions
Shouldn't that second line have some curly braces? Like maybe:
\df{antw}[S+] [PATTERN] list only
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
\df[antw][S+] list [only agg/normal/trigger/window] functions
(one line only, removing the second redundant line). This seems
clea[nr]er to me. Bruce says it would confuse users.
That's clear to me, anyway (if you include PATTERN).
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
The problem is I don't see curly braces used anywhere in \?
I see it in 8.3:
: \d{t|i|s|v|S} [PATTERN] (add + for more detail)
:list tables/indexes/sequences/views/system tables
and:
: \pset NAME [VALUE]
:set table
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:26:13AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 12:19 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I suggested this to Bruce over IM:
\df[antw][S+] list [only agg/normal/trigger/window] functions
(one line only, removing the second redundant line). This
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:33:26AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 09:26:13AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 12:19 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I suggested this to Bruce over IM:
\df[antw][S+] list [only agg/normal/trigger/window]
David Fetter wrote:
Oh, and I forgot to send some error-handling and cleanup code per
Alvaro. Please find attached. :)
Declarations before code please.
--
Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
--
Sent via
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
The problem is I don't see curly braces used anywhere in \?
I see it in 8.3:
: \d{t|i|s|v|S} [PATTERN] (add + for more detail)
:list tables/indexes/sequences/views/system tables
Yeah.
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 01:04:44PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
Oh, and I forgot to send some error-handling and cleanup code per
Alvaro. Please find attached. :)
Declarations before code please.
Fixed patch attached.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list only agg/normal/trigger/window functions
Shouldn't that second line have some curly braces? Like maybe:
\df{antw}[S+]
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 01:04:44PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
Oh, and I forgot to send some error-handling and cleanup code per
Alvaro. Please find attached. :)
Declarations before code please.
Fixed patch attached.
Applied.
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 01:26:33PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
[...]
I merged the entries into one line:
\df[antwS+] [PATTERN] list (only agg/normal/trigger/window) functions
I didn't feel I had room to do [][] like Alvaro suggested.
David Fetter wrote:
Is this any better?
So what happens if I do \dfaQ? It should throw an error, yes?
This help line:
+ fprintf(output, _( \\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions. Add a, n,
t, w for aggregate, normal, trigger, window\n));
needs shortening to below 80 chars (or maybe
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:42:31PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
Is this any better?
So what happens if I do \dfaQ? It should throw an error, yes?
This help line:
+ fprintf(output, _( \\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions. Add a, n,
t, w for aggregate,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:42:31PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
Is this any better?
So what happens if I do \dfaQ? It should throw an error, yes?
Interesting question.
This help line:
+ fprintf(output, _( \\df[S+] [PATTERN] list functions. Add a, n,
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 03:18:06PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:52:32PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
I had a second thought about that: presumably we should make the
function type names translatable. If we do that, it might be better
to make
David Fetter wrote:
I think it's good to have them translatable. As for using aggregate
instead of agg I don't think it's that great an idea. If you need to
notify translators that agg stands for aggregate, add a
/* translator: */ comment.
The translator: comment needs to be in
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 08:54:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
I think it's good to have them translatable. As for using aggregate
instead of agg I don't think it's that great an idea. If you need to
notify translators that agg stands for aggregate, add a
David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 08:54:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
The translator: comment needs to be in the line just above the
string.
Is this any better?
Yeah, this one is good (as far as this very minor detail is concerned anyway)
--
Alvaro Herrera
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 07:24:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd go for something like
Type
window
agg
trigger
normal
Or we could spell out aggregate, but that makes the column a
couple of characters wider ...
Done.
I had a second thought about
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:35:21PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 07:24:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd go for something like
Type
window
agg
trigger
normal
Or we could spell out aggregate, but that makes the column a
Tom Lane wrote:
I had a second thought about that: presumably we should make the
function type names translatable. If we do that, it might be better
to make the aggregate case be aggregate and take the width hit.
Otherwise translators are going to be puzzled when they come across
agg as a
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:52:32PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
I had a second thought about that: presumably we should make the
function type names translatable. If we do that, it might be
better to make the aggregate case be aggregate and take the
width hit.
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:52:32PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I think it's good to have them translatable. As for using
aggregate instead of agg I don't think it's that great an idea.
If you need to notify translators that agg stands for aggregate,
add a /*
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 03:04:55PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:52:32PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I think it's good to have them translatable. As for using
aggregate instead of agg I don't think it's that great an
idea. If you need
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:52:32PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
I had a second thought about that: presumably we should make the
function type names translatable. If we do that, it might be better
to make the aggregate case be aggregate and take the width hit.
Otherwise
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
Here's a patch that adds a Function Type column to \df while
removing the now-redundant \da.
Removing \da altogether was nowhere in the consensus, or even in the
discussion AFAIR. Also, what is the point of using single-letter
type codes when you've made
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Here's a patch that adds a Function Type column to \df while
removing the now-redundant \da.
1. How does it make it redundant - is there a way to view all
aggregates with \df now?
2. Even if the above is satisfied, I think we need a little
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 07:24:31PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
David Fetter da...@fetter.org writes:
Here's a patch that adds a Function Type column to \df while
removing the now-redundant \da.
Removing \da altogether was nowhere in the consensus, or even in the
discussion AFAIR.
It's back.
49 matches
Mail list logo
