From: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: psql line number reporting from stdin |
Date: | 2011-11-28 13:49:46 |
Message-ID: | CABwTF4X67wZvZp7y80zErE41bVb6aE5o29M=6trK4ZArFTGSqw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> > There is a long-standing oddity in psql that running
> >
> > psql -f foo.sql
> >
> > returns error messages with file name and line number, like
> >
> > psql:foo.sql:1: ERROR: syntax error at or near "foo"
> >
> > but running
> >
> > psql < foo.sql does not. I suggest we change the latter to print
> >
> > psql:<stdin>:1: ERROR: syntax error at or near "foo"
> >
> > Other examples for the use of the spelling "<stdin>" in this context
> > include gcc and slonik.
> >
> > Error messages printed in interactive mode will not be affected, of
> > course.
> >
> > Patch attached.
>
> Seems like a good idea to me.
>
Naysayers can always make a case for backwards-compatibility, or not
breaking the scripts written with the existing behaviour in mind. Do our
docs have anything to say about scripts executed from stdin?
--
Gurjeet Singh
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-11-28 13:51:15 | Re: Patch: add timing of buffer I/O requests |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-11-28 13:12:23 | Re: odbc_fdw |