On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 14:31, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> writes:
>> How about something like the below?
>
> I still think that this is optimizing the wrong thing.  We care about
> the clarity of the message the user sees, not about how short or clean
> the Perl code is.  I'm inclined to stay with the same basic
> implementation and just hack up the regexp some more to cope with 5.11's
> more verbose -v output.

Cant argue with that.  However, I dont think my sed foo is up to the
challenge ATM. :)

BTW this is the perl commit that changed it:

commit ded326e4b6fad7e2479796691d0c27b89d2fe080
Author: David Golden <dagol...@cpan.org>
Date:   Thu Nov 12 10:46:30 2009 -0500

    Change perl -v version format

    New format:

      This is perl 5, version 11, subversion 1 (v5.11.1) ...

    The rationale for this change is that the Perl 5 interpreter will never
    increment PERL_REVISION from 5 to 6, so we want people to start focusing
    on the PERL_VERSION number as most significant and PERL_SUBVERSION as
    equivalent to a "release number".  In other words, "perl 5" is a
    language, this is the 11th version of it, and the second release of that
    version (counting from zero).  Among other things, this makes the
    output of -v and -V more consistent.

    The old v-string style is included for familiarity and usage in code.
    For builds from git, it will include the same extended format as it
    did before, e.g. "(v5.11.1-176-gaf24cc9*)"

-- 
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs

Reply via email to