| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: new border setting in psql |
| Date: | 2008-08-24 17:22:38 |
| Message-ID: | 24277.1219598558@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> writes:
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:57:50 -0400
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> So, quite aside from the question of whether we care to support ReST,
>> my opinion is that this patch fails to do so, and a significantly more
>> invasive patch would be needed to do it.
> I suppose it is my fault for mentioning ReST. That was the reason I
> looked into this but that is not what the final proposal is.
Well, if you can't just paste your output into ReST without having to
hand-munge it afterwards, then ISTM the argument for having this
additional bit of complexity in our printing routines really falls flat.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-08-24 17:43:23 | Re: proposal sql: labeled function params |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-08-24 17:17:14 | Extending error-location reports deeper into the system |