Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Date: 2009-01-20 15:33:09
Message-ID: 404c0f98ef0f040c4d122803c5b766e8@biglumber.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

> In thinking last night, I am now wondering if a letter is really the
> right symbol for this. We already have letter flags which control
> object type selection, but the system table addition is kind of
> independent of those flags, like '+' now. I am thinking maybe '&' is
> the right symbol rather than 'A' or 'S'.

What problem are we trying to solve here that is not already solved by
using 'S' for system tables, which has been in use in psql for over a
decade now?

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
End Point Corporation
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200901201026
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkl17psACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjdRACgoAJPOBsWYPf420KLl/7tuPTa
By0AoORZBVnszD5SmGUpKvBHR7YFES7r
=AILx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2009-01-20 15:38:28 Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-01-20 15:32:29 Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch