| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | bt22kawamotok <bt22kawamotok(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Shinya Kato <Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH]Feature improvement for MERGE tab completion |
| Date: | 2022-09-21 10:40:00 |
| Message-ID: | 20220921104000.64a2pp3wmhwlo37u@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-Sep-21, Fujii Masao wrote:
> How about adding something like PartialMatches() that checks whether
> the keywords are included in the input string or not? If so, we can restrict
> some tab-completion rules to operating only on MERGE, as follows. I attached
> the WIP patch (0002 patch) that introduces PartialMatches().
> Is this approach over-complicated? Thought?
I think it's fine to backpatch your 0001 to 15 and put 0002 in master.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I can't go to a restaurant and order food because I keep looking at the
fonts on the menu. Five minutes later I realize that it's also talking
about food" (Donald Knuth)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2022-09-21 10:40:38 | Re: Refactor backup related code (was: Is it correct to say, "invalid data in file \"%s\"", BACKUP_LABEL_FILE in do_pg_backup_stop?) |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2022-09-21 10:22:42 | Re: Add common function ReplicationOriginName. |