| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Making tab-complete.c easier to maintain |
| Date: | 2015-10-23 17:19:35 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1zRsaaSF_8qyQNYqOcDt0Xa7Awk==YdWCeTZtNhjnPNww@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for taking a look at this! The word count returned by
> get_previous_words was incorrect. Here is a corrected version.
>
I haven't looked at v6 yet, but in v5:
"set work_mem TO" completes to "NULL" not to "DEFAULT"
line 2665 of the patched tab complete file,, should be "DEFAULT", not
"NULL" as the completion string. Looks like a simple copy and paste error.
For the bigger picture, I don't think we should not apply this patch simply
because there is something even better we might theoretically do at some
point in the future. Having used it a little bit, I do agree with Robert
that it is not a gigantic improvement over the current situation, as the
code it replaces is largely mechanical boilerplate. But I think it is
enough of an improvement that we should go ahead with it.
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-10-23 17:50:58 | Re: Making tab-complete.c easier to maintain |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-10-23 16:39:50 | Re: Making tab-complete.c easier to maintain |