Re: Invisible PROMPT2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Invisible PROMPT2
Date
Msg-id 20559.1573743483@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Invisible PROMPT2  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Invisible PROMPT2  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> writes:
> This seems assuming %x are a kind of stable (until semicolon)
> function. But at least %`..` can be volatile.  So, I think the %w
> thing in PROMPT2 should be able to refer the actual prompt string
> resulted from PROMPT1.

Oh, that's a good point.  But it actually leads to a much simpler
definition and implementation than the other ideas we've kicked
around: define %w as "whitespace equal to the length of the
last-generated PROMPT1 string (initially empty)", and we just
have to save PROMPT1 each time we generate it.

Except ... I'm not sure how to deal with hidden escape sequences.
We should probably assume that anything inside %[...%] has width
zero, but how would we remember that?

Maybe count the width of non-escape characters whenever we
generate PROMPT1, and just save that number not the string?
It'd add overhead that's useless when there's no %w, but
probably not enough to care about.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Add more compile-time asserts to exposeinconsistencies.
Next
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: 2019-11-14 Press Release Draft