On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> BTW, at least in the usage in that loop, get_functiondef_dollarquote_tag >>> seems grossly overdesigned. It would be clearer, shorter, and faster if >>> you just had a strncmp test for "AS $function" there. > >> As far as I can see, the only purpose of that code is to support the >> desire to have \sf+ display **** rather than a line number for the >> lines that FOLLOW the function body. But I'm wondering if we should >> just forget about that and let the numbering run continuously from the >> first "AS $function" line to end of file. That would get rid of a >> bunch of rather grotty code in the \sf patch, also. > > Oh? Considering that in the standard pg_get_functiondef output, the > ending $function$ delimiter is always on the very last line, that sounds > pretty useless. +1 for just numbering forward from the start line.
OK. > BTW, the last I looked, \sf+ was using what I thought to be a quite ugly > and poorly-considered formatting for the line number. I would suggest > eight blanks for a header line and "%-7d " as the prefix format for a > numbered line. The reason for making sure the prefix is 8 columns rather > than some other width is to not mess up tab-based formatting of the > function body. I would also prefer a lot more visual separation between > the line number and the code than "%4d " will offer; and as for the > stars, they're just useless and distracting. I don't have a strong preference, but that seems reasonable. I suggest that we punt the \sf portion of this patch back for rework for the next CommitFest, and focus on getting the \e and \ef changes committed. I think the \sf code can be a lot simpler if we get rid of the code that's intended to recognize the ending delimeter. Another thought is that we might want to add a comment to pg_get_functiondef() noting that anyone changing the output format should be careful not to break the line-number-finding form of \ef in the process. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
