Re: [PATCH] Add pretty-printed XML output option

On 22.02.23 23:45, Peter Smith wrote:
> src/backend/executor/execExprInterp.c
>> 2. ExecEvalXmlExpr
>>
>> @@ -3829,7 +3829,8 @@ ExecEvalXmlExpr(ExprState *state, ExprEvalStep *op)
>> {
>> Datum *argvalue = op->d.xmlexpr.argvalue;
>> bool *argnull = op->d.xmlexpr.argnull;
>> -
>> + bool indent = op->d.xmlexpr.xexpr->indent;
>> + text *data;
>> /* argument type is known to be xml */
>> Assert(list_length(xexpr->args) == 1);
>> Missing whitespace after the variable declarations
> Whitespace added.
>
> ~
>
> Oh, I meant something different to that fix. I meant there is a
> missing blank line after the last ('data') variable declaration.
I believe I see it now (it took me a while) :)
> ======
> Test code.
>
> I wondered if there ought to be a test that demonstrates explicitly
> saying NO INDENT will give the identical result to just omitting it.
>
> For example:
>
> test=# -- no indent is default
> test=# SELECT xmlserialize(DOCUMENT '<foo><bar><val
> x="y">42</val></bar></foo>' AS text) = xmlserialize(DOCUMENT
> '<foo><bar><val x="y">42</val></bar></foo>' AS text NO INDENT);
> ?column?
> ----------
> t
> (1 row)
>
> test=# SELECT xmlserialize(CONTENT '<foo><bar><val
> x="y">42</val></bar></foo>' AS text) = xmlserialize(CONTENT
> '<foo><bar><val x="y">42</val></bar></foo>' AS text NO INDENT);
> ?column?
> ----------
> t
> (1 row)

Actually NO INDENT just ignores this feature and doesn't call the
function at all, so in this particular case the result sets will always
be identical. But yes, I totally agree that a test case for that is also
important.

v17 attached.

Thanks!

Best, Jim