Re: \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: [HACKERS] PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: [HACKERS] PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)
Date
Msg-id 1084.1485886511@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: [HACKERS] PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)  (Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: [HACKERS] PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)  (Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
>> The ParseVariableBool function has been updated, and the new version is
>> much cleaner, including all fixes that I suggested in your copy, so you can
>> use it in your patch.

> I see there's still a lot of activity in the thread, I can't tell if it's
> directly related to ParseVariableBool() or in the way it is called. Should
> I wait for the dust to settle over there?

I think ParseVariableBool is only likely to change to reject a NULL value
rather than silently interpreting it as FALSE, which is the way it is in
HEAD right now.  That behavior is a leftover hack, really, and moving the
treatment of unset values upstream seems a lot cleaner.  See my draft
patch at
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/30629.1485881533@sss.pgh.pa.us
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Improvements in psql hooks for variables
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Floating point comparison inconsistencies of thegeometric types