| From: | Peter Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dan Langille <dan(at)langille(dot)org>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: psql and readline |
| Date: | 2003-01-09 16:23:29 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0301091619280.1613-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Rod Taylor wrote:
> > I'd tend to switch it to store \E QUERY BUFFER in the history, and
> > possibly remove the ability to use \e by itself -- or make \E FILENAME
> > and \e QUERY BUFFER.
> >
> > Since the use of \e isn't likely to be used in a programmatic
> > (automated) way, but only by users who could quickly figure it out.
>
> I don't think it makes sense to remove \e just to add history
> functionality.
I agree. Also more people would type \e than they would \E. Also they are
used to having \e available. Adding the functionality to the history is
useful, but we shouldn't change things too much.
I currently think that if \e is typed on it's own, then \E QUERY BUFFER
goes into the history. Keep the existing behaviour of \e FILENAME the
same. I'd doubt that a user would type \E QUERY BUFFER themselves often
(if at all).
Peter
--
Peter Mount
peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk
http://www.retep.org.uk/
Tel/Fax: +44 (0) 1622 749439
Mobile: +44 (0) 7903 155887
US Fax: 1 435 304 5165
US Voice: 1 435 304 5165
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Clift | 2003-01-09 16:23:56 | Re: psql and readline |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-09 16:18:55 | Re: psql and readline |