st 10. 5. 2023 v 19:08 odesílatel Kirk Wolak <wol...@gmail.com> napsal:
> On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 12:20 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi >> >> st 10. 5. 2023 v 17:33 odesílatel Kirk Wolak <wol...@gmail.com> napsal: >> >>> We already have >>> \ef >>> \ev >>> >>> The use case here is simply that it saves me from: >>> \d <table> >>> [scroll through all the fields] >>> [often scroll right] >>> select function name >>> \ef [paste function name] >>> >>> and tab completion is much narrower >>> >>> When doing conversions and reviews all of this stuff has to be reviewed. >>> Oftentimes, renamed, touched. >>> >>> I am 100% willing to write the code, docs, etc. but would appreciate >>> feedback. >>> >> >> \et can be little bit confusing, because looks like editing trigger, not >> trigger function >> >> what \eft triggername >> >> ? >> >> Pavel, I am "torn" because of my OCD, I would expect > \eft <TAB> > to list functions that RETURN TRIGGER as opposed to the level of > indirection I was aiming for. > > where > \et <TAB> > Would specifically let me complete the Trigger_Name, but find the > function > > It makes me wonder, now if: > \etf > > Is better for this (edit trigger function... given the trigger name). > And as another poster suggested. As we do the AUTOCOMPLETE for that, we > could address it for: > \ef? > > because: > \eft <TAB> > is valuable as well, and deserves to work just like all \ef? items > > It seems like a logical way to break it down. > This is a problem, and it isn't easy to find a design that is consistent and useful. Maybe Tom's proposal "\st" is best, although the "t" can be messy - it can be "t" like table or "t" like trigger or "t" like type. Personally, I don't like editing DDL in psql or pgAdmin. In all my training I say "don't do it". But on second hand, I agree so it can be handy for prototyping or for some playing. I think implementing "\st triggername" can be a good start, and then we can continue in design later. My comments: * Maybe "\str" can be better than only "\st". Only "\st" can be confusing - minimally we use "t" like symbol for tables * I think so arguments can be - tablename, triggername or [tablename triggername] It can display more triggers than just one when specification is general or result is not uniq Regards Pavel > regards >> >> Pavel >> >> >> >>> >>> Kirk... >>> >>
