From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: psql possible TODO |
Date: | 2006-12-05 22:34:13 |
Message-ID: | 200612052234.kB5MYDn24974@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > control-R isn't real useful for 17 queries that are exactly the same
> > except for 3 different join clauses. It also isn't useful when you don't
> > know exactly what query you are looking for.
>
> ... but, somehow, you know exactly what command number it has?
> The above seems completely unimpressive as arguments for adding
> command-number-based recall.
>
> >> What we have is just like bash --- at least the parts of it that I use.
> > Yes, and I am trying to add more functionality that is like bash :)
>
> It's like a part of bash that's been obsolete since readline was
> written, and probably would never have existed at all if readline had
> appeared first. I can't really picture a situation in which this is an
> improvement over the readline facilities.
Yea, that was my impression. It seemed so awkward, but so is 'vi' to
me. (Me ducks.)
--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-05 22:34:58 | Re: psql possible TODO |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-05 22:30:03 | Re: psql possible TODO |