| From: | Tatsuya Kawata <kawatatatsuya0913(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Patch]Add tab completion for DELETE ... USING |
| Date: | 2026-01-04 13:37:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAHza6qdChnuqT15axbOy6jH6E7WHixisNebmFdN=rU38riVKNA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi!
Thank you for your review!
> HI! What makes you think we need additional tab completion tests at all?
> If we consult src/bin/psql changes history [0], it can be easily seen
> that not every change to tab-complete.in.c is made with a new test.
> This is (my own understanding, I may be wrong) because we only need to
> test tab-complete patterns that are functionally different, not mirror
> all cases from tab-complete.in.c in the TAP test.
I agree that not every tab-complete change requires tests, and we don't
need to mirror all cases from tab-complete.in.c. I also think tests that
provide little benefit compared to their maintenance cost can be omitted.
However, since this patch implements a previously unimplemented feature
(removing a XXX TODO comment), I believe the primary test cases should be
kept to verify the core functionality and prevent regressions.
That said, I can reduce the test cases. The current 4 tests could be
reduced to 2:
One for USING <TAB> (core functionality: table completion)
One for USING <table> <TAB> (keyword completion after table)
WDYT?
Regards,
Tatsuya Kawata
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2026-01-04 14:01:44 | Re: Row pattern recognition |
| Previous Message | Sergey Soloviev | 2026-01-04 13:09:27 | Re: Introduce Index Aggregate - new GROUP BY strategy |