Re: [HACKERS] psql and comments

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] psql and comments
Date: 1999-10-11 20:31:42
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.10.9910112225240.832-100000@peter-e.yi.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Oct 11, Thomas Lockhart mentioned:

> > some query;
> > *** comment
> > *** comment
> > \p
> > \r
> > more queries;
> > which should probably be changed anyway to something like
> > -- comment
> > -- comment
>
> Actually, this is probably testing that the buffer reset actually
> clears the lines, which wouldn't be as obvious if there were only
> legal SQL preceeding it. Maybe leave it as-is??

I think I figured that out: the *** comments actually show up in the
output of the regression tests as an aid to a person glancing at the
results. If the regression tests wanted to test psql then they could
certainly do a lot more fun things than that.

I was planning on implementing an \echo command which could easily be
dropped in there as a more elegant solution.

Which makes me think. The server regression tests should certainly not
rely on some particular psql functionality, just as a matter of principle.
But if I'm ever really bored I could write a separate psql regression
test. No promise though.

-Peter

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-10-11 20:51:46 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Next release is 7.0(?)
Previous Message Sergio A. Kessler 1999-10-11 20:31:36 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Next release is 7.0(?)