Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> > Brendan Jurd escribi?:
> >> I for one would definitely like backslash commands with very wide
> >> output to be wrapped by default.
> >
> > (At least) one place where I would not like it is in \df+, because
> > wrapped function output would be more difficult to read.
> >
>
> I am a bit conflicted about wrapping on \df. I agree that wrapped
> function code is difficult to read, but what we've got now is
> difficult to read too. Which of the two is more difficult is really a
> matter of personal taste. I guess with \df you have to accept that
> it's always going to be ugly, unless you have a very wide terminal (or
> very short function definitions!).
Oh, good point. I hadn't thought about function bodies being displayed.
Here is an example:
test=> \pset format wrappedOutput format is wrapped.test=> \pset columns 14Target width for "wrapped" format is
14.test=>select prosrc from pg_proc where proname = 'xx'; prosrc-------------- SELECT 'a': :text WHERE 1 = 1(1
row)
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
