Pavel Stehule wrote:
2009/10/29 Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net>:
Pavel Stehule wrote:
2009/10/27 Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com>:
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 00:38 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
new feature
One additional point that would be useful is a way to match up the usage
of custom_variable_classes with this new style of .conf file processing.
At the moment if you wish to add a custom variable class everybody needs
to edit the *same* parameter. Finding which one to edit could be a
little difficult with a whole directory to search in.
I propose a new form of processing for that variable: each new parameter
instance is added to last one, rather than replacing it.
e.g.
custom_variable_class = 'x'
custom_variable_class = 'y'
custom_variable_class = 'z'
is equivalent to
custom_variable_classes = 'x,y,z'
That allows NewFeatureX to drop in a file called "newfeaturex.conf",
which looks like this
custom_variable_class = 'newfeaturex'
newfeaturex.param1 = x
newfeaturex.param2 = y
newfeaturex.param3 = z
This requires no editing of any other files, just a straight drop in.
That will make it much easier to produce real installers/deinstallers
for add-in modules.
I understand, but this behave is confusing. Maybe better is using some
trivial keywords like append, delete, reset
so
append custom_variable_class = 'x'
append custom_variable_class = 'y'
append custom_variable_class = 'z'
is custom_variable_classes = 'x,y,z'
Why not allow something like += or .= instead of the = to denote appending
to a list?
custom_variable_classes += 'x'
seems a whole lot nicer to me.
-1
not all people knows C like languages. I don't thing so this is
readable for non programmers.
Really, they don't know any Perl or Python or Java either? Maybe.
Anyway, it seems to me a whole lot better than inventing a new thing
that makes "custom_variable_class" as something to append to
"custom_variable_classes". If you're going to insist on using "append
foo = 'x'" at least let it apply to the list that is actually being
appended to, so we don't need to keep track of singular and plural
forms. That's the part of your suggestion I really object to.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
