Re: [DOC] add missing "[ NO ]" to various "DEPENDS ON" synopses

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [DOC] add missing "[ NO ]" to various "DEPENDS ON" synopses
Date: 2021-02-17 03:00:49
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 11:18:47AM +0900, Ian Lawrence Barwick wrote:
> Hmm, with the current implementation "alter index my_index no <TAB>"
> doesn't work
> anyway; you'd need to add this before the above lines:
> + else if (Matches("ALTER", "INDEX", MatchAny, "NO"))
> so AFAICT the patch doesn't change that behaviour. It does mean "alter index
> my_index no depends <TAB>" no longer completes to "ON EXTENSION", but if
> you've
> typed one of "NO" or "DEPENDS" in that context, "ON EXTENSION" is the only
> completion so I'm not sure what's gained by forcing the user to hit TAB
> twice.

You are right. It looks like I have tested without a whitespace after
the "NO". With a whitespace it does not work, so that looks like a
complication for little gain. Another problem with the code on HEAD
is that you would not complete properly "NO DEPENDS ON", so that feels

> There are quite a few tab completions consisting of more than one word
> (e.g. "MATERIALIZED VIEW", "FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY") where tab completion
> is
> ineffective after the first word followed by a space, e.g. "alter
> materialized
> <TAB>" doesn't result in any expansion either. I suppose we could go
> through all
> those and handle each word individually, but presumably there's a reason why
> that hasn't been done already (maybe no-one has complained?).

Because that's just extra maintenance as most people will just
complete after typing the first set of characters? This part got
discussed as of 1e324cb:

Anyway, after sleeping on it, I have just applied your original patch
as that's simpler, and will cover the cases people would care for.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2021-02-17 04:05:26 Re: Is it worth accepting multiple CRLs?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2021-02-17 02:20:26 Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY