On Tue, 2002-03-12 at 13:21, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
> Neil,
> You don't actually _use_ psql much, do you?
I do use it a fair amount -- but I find the accusatory tone a bit
unnecessary. I'm trying to improve psql here -- perhaps our views
differ, but so what? I'm willing to be convinced...
> Yes, it's a different mode of
> operation than a straight interpreter. That's actually a good thing. The
> change you've suggested 'for consistencies sake' strike me as making
> psql a lot more difficult to use, in particular, clearing the buffer
> on error. One of the big differences is that multiline input is handled
> differently - if you've got a long buffer, it's in multiple lines. Perhaps
> that should be changed to more like bash's handling of multiline input,
> bug throwing it away is wrong.
Well sure, don't clear the buffer on error -- recall the last line of
input and put the cursor where the error occured. That's another one of
the suggestions I made, and I think it satisfies your concerns. Peter
said he'd look into implementing it.
Regardless, I do think the current behavior should be improved. In the
case I ran into (a simple SQL statement with a malformed backslash
command) psql behaves in an extremely unintuitive fashion: the previous
buffer is silently prepended to the current one, and the only indication
of this is that the prompt changes to a "->".
Whether this is improved by clearing the buffer (and thus returning to
"=>"), or by recalling the previous buffer and printing it to the screen
(allowing the user to continue editing it), I don't really mind.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
