Re: Commands/ directory reorganisation

Until you open it in an editor with tabs that only shows the filename
(on the tab).

Sure, once you've selected the file you know what it is -- but not at
a quick glance.
--
Rod Taylor

Your eyes are weary from staring at the CRT. You feel sleepy. Notice
how restful it is to watch the cursor blink. Close your eyes. The
opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt
otherwise.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>; "John Gray"
<jgray(at)azuli(dot)co(dot)uk>; <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>; "Bruce Momjian"
<pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Commands/ directory reorganisation

> On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > > Isn't the "cmds" in the file names kind of redundant?
> >
> > That was at my suggestion, actually. I thought names like
"aggregate.c"
> > were too generic --- too easy to confuse with similarly-named
files
> > elsewhere in the tree. (For example, I regularly get confused by
the
> > existence of analyze.c in both commands/ and parser/.)
>
> ya, but shouldn't the fact that its commands/analyze.c and
> parser/analyze.c eliminate the confusion? :)
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>