Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Tom Lane wrote: > Pushed, thanks. > BTW, I see we've been spelling your name with an insufficient number > of accents in the commit logs and release notes. Can't do much about > the logs, but will fix the release notes. I use myself the nonaccented version of my name in "From" headers,

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

"Daniel Verite" writes: > Checking http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/app-psql.html , > I notice that the last example is still using the syntax for arguments > that has been deprecated by commit 6f0d6a507, as discussed in this > thread. Ooops. > A fix to

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Tom Lane wrote: > > "Daniel Verite" writes: > >> To avoid the confusion between "2:4" and "2":"4" or 2:4, > >> and the ambiguity with a possibly existing "2:4" column, > >> maybe we should abandon this syntax and require the optional > >> scolH to be on its own

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: > > My feeling is that what we should do is undo the change to use OT_SQLID, > > and in indexOfColumn() perform a downcasing/dequoting conversion that > > duplicates what OT_SQLID does in psqlscanslash.l. > > Here's an updated patch that does it that way, and

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

I wrote: > My feeling is that what we should do is undo the change to use OT_SQLID, > and in indexOfColumn() perform a downcasing/dequoting conversion that > duplicates what OT_SQLID does in psqlscanslash.l. Here's an updated patch that does it that way, and also adopts Christoph's documentation

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

"Daniel Verite" writes: > Christoph Berg wrote: >> If there's no way out, what about changing it the other way, i.e. >> breaking the case where the column is named by a number? That seems >> much less of a problem in practice. > I don't think it would be acceptable. I

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Christoph Berg wrote: > If there's no way out, what about changing it the other way, i.e. > breaking the case where the column is named by a number? That seems > much less of a problem in practice. I don't think it would be acceptable. But there's still the option of keeping the

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Christoph Berg wrote: > > I don't quite see how to work around that, short of simply > > removing the possibility of addressing columns by their > > numbers. [...] > That would be bad news, given that \crosstabview is meant for > interactive use where these number shortcuts are much more

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Re: Daniel Verite 2016-04-14 > I don't quite see how to work around that, short of simply > removing the possibility of addressing columns by their > numbers. Which maybe is a bit sad for the end user, I'm not > sure, but ISTM that's a logical consequence

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Tom Lane wrote: > > That would be OK with me; it's certainly less of a hack than what's > > there now. (I went back and forth about how much effort to put into > > dealing with the colon syntax; I think the version I have in my patch > > would be all right, but it's not perfect.) > >

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Re: Tom Lane 2016-04-14 <15673.1460592...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > Here's a patch along those lines. Any objections? > \crosstabview [ > colV > ! [ colH > ! [ colD > ! [ scolH > ! ] ] ] ] Maybe use "sortcolH" to make it

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

I wrote: > "Daniel Verite" writes: >> To avoid the confusion between "2:4" and "2":"4" or 2:4, >> and the ambiguity with a possibly existing "2:4" column, >> maybe we should abandon this syntax and require the optional >> scolH to be on its own at the end of the command.

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Alvaro Herrera writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> (I also took the trouble to make the error messages conform >> to project style.) > Not sure about this part. Many psql error messages are full sentences (start > with uppercase, end in period); others start with the \

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

"Daniel Verite" writes: > To avoid the confusion between "2:4" and "2":"4" or 2:4, > and the ambiguity with a possibly existing "2:4" column, > maybe we should abandon this syntax and require the optional > scolH to be on its own at the end of the command. That would be

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Tom Lane wrote: > I noticed that the \crosstabview documentation asserts that column name > arguments are handled per standard SQL semantics. In point of fact, > though, the patch expends a couple hundred lines to implement what is > NOT standard SQL semantics: matching unquoted names

Re: [HACKERS] \crosstabview fixes

Tom Lane wrote: > I noticed that the \crosstabview documentation asserts that column name > arguments are handled per standard SQL semantics. In point of fact, > though, the patch expends a couple hundred lines to implement what is > NOT standard SQL semantics: matching unquoted names