Thread: Invisible PROMPT2
Hello hackers,
From the advanced bikeshedding department: I'd like my psql
transcripts to have the usual alignment, but be easier to copy and
paste later without having weird prompt stuff in the middle. How
about a prompt format directive %w that means "whitespace of the same
width as %/"? Then you can make set your PROMPT2 to '%w ' and it
becomes invisible:
pgdu=# create table foo (
i int,
j int
);
CREATE TABLE
pgdu=#
Attachment
st 13. 11. 2019 v 4:15 odesílatel Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> napsal:
Hello hackers,
From the advanced bikeshedding department: I'd like my psql
transcripts to have the usual alignment, but be easier to copy and
paste later without having weird prompt stuff in the middle. How
about a prompt format directive %w that means "whitespace of the same
width as %/"? Then you can make set your PROMPT2 to '%w ' and it
becomes invisible:
pgdu=# create table foo (
i int,
j int
);
CREATE TABLE
pgdu=#
+1
Pavel
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > Hello hackers, > > From the advanced bikeshedding department: I'd like my psql > transcripts to have the usual alignment, but be easier to copy and > paste later without having weird prompt stuff in the middle. How > about a prompt format directive %w that means "whitespace of the same > width as %/"? Then you can make set your PROMPT2 to '%w ' and it > becomes invisible: That only lines up nicely if %/ is the only variable-width directive in PROMPT1. How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? - ilmari -- "The surreality of the universe tends towards a maximum" -- Skud's Law "Never formulate a law or axiom that you're not prepared to live with the consequences of." -- Skud's Meta-Law
ilmari@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes:
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
>> From the advanced bikeshedding department: I'd like my psql
>> transcripts to have the usual alignment, but be easier to copy and
>> paste later without having weird prompt stuff in the middle. How
>> about a prompt format directive %w that means "whitespace of the same
>> width as %/"? Then you can make set your PROMPT2 to '%w ' and it
>> becomes invisible:
> That only lines up nicely if %/ is the only variable-width directive in
> PROMPT1.
Yeah, that was my first reaction too.
> How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %])
> that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width?
Or just define %w as meaning "whitespace of the same width as
PROMPT1". You couldn't use it *in* PROMPT1, then, but I see
no use-case for that anyway.
regards, tom lane
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 09:47:01AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > ilmari@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes: > > Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > >> From the advanced bikeshedding department: I'd like my psql > >> transcripts to have the usual alignment, but be easier to copy and > >> paste later without having weird prompt stuff in the middle. How > >> about a prompt format directive %w that means "whitespace of the same > >> width as %/"? Then you can make set your PROMPT2 to '%w ' and it > >> becomes invisible: > > > That only lines up nicely if %/ is the only variable-width directive in > > PROMPT1. > > Yeah, that was my first reaction too. > > > How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) > > that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? > > Or just define %w as meaning "whitespace of the same width as > PROMPT1". You couldn't use it *in* PROMPT1, then, but I see > no use-case for that anyway. +1 for doing it this way. Would it make more sense to error out if somebody tried to set that in PROMPT1, or ignore it, or...? Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
On 11/13/19 12:49 PM, David Fetter wrote: >> Or just define %w as meaning "whitespace of the same width as >> PROMPT1". You couldn't use it *in* PROMPT1, then, but I see >> no use-case for that anyway. > > +1 for doing it this way. Would it make more sense to error out if > somebody tried to set that in PROMPT1, or ignore it, or...? Define it as "difference between PROMPT1's width and the total width of non-%w elements in this prompt". Then it has a defined meaning in PROMPT1 too (which could be arbitrary if it appears only once, but has to be zero in case it appears more than once). Easter egg: expand it to backspaces if used in PROMPT2 among other stuff that's already wider than PROMPT1. ;) Regards, -Chap
On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 09:47:01AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) > > > that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? > > > > Or just define %w as meaning "whitespace of the same width as > > PROMPT1". You couldn't use it *in* PROMPT1, then, but I see > > no use-case for that anyway. > > +1 for doing it this way. Would it make more sense to error out if > somebody tried to set that in PROMPT1, or ignore it, or...? This seems way too specific to me. I like the "circumfix" directive better, because it allows one to do more things. I don't have any immediate use for it, but it doesn't seem completely far-fetched that there are some. BTW the psql manual says that %[ and %] were plagiarized from tcsh, but that's a lie: tcsh does not contain such a feature. Bash does, however. (I guess not many people read the tcsh manual.) Neither bash nor tcsh have a feature to return whitespace of anything; we're in a green field here ISTM. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:06:08PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 09:47:01AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) > > > > that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? > > > > > > Or just define %w as meaning "whitespace of the same width as > > > PROMPT1". You couldn't use it *in* PROMPT1, then, but I see > > > no use-case for that anyway. > > > > +1 for doing it this way. Would it make more sense to error out if > > somebody tried to set that in PROMPT1, or ignore it, or...? > > This seems way too specific to me. I like the "circumfix" directive > better, because it allows one to do more things. I don't have any > immediate use for it, but it doesn't seem completely far-fetched that > there are some. > > BTW the psql manual says that %[ and %] were plagiarized from tcsh, but > that's a lie: tcsh does not contain such a feature. Bash does, however. > (I guess not many people read the tcsh manual.) > > Neither bash nor tcsh have a feature to return whitespace of anything; > we're in a green field here ISTM. So something like %w[...%w] where people could put things like PROMPT1 inside? Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:06:08PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 09:47:01AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > > > How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) > > > > > that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? > > This seems way too specific to me. I like the "circumfix" directive > > better, because it allows one to do more things. I don't have any > > immediate use for it, but it doesn't seem completely far-fetched that > > there are some. > So something like %w[...%w] where people could put things like PROMPT1 > inside? Hmm, (I'm not sure your proposed syntax works, but let's assume that it does.) I'm saying you'd define \set PROMPT1 '%a%b%c ' \set PROMPT2 '%w[%a%b%c %w]' and you'd end up with matching indentation on multiline queries. I'm not sure that we'd need to make something like this work: PROMPT1="%w[$PROMPT1%w]" which I think is what you're saying. We already have "%:PROMPT1:" but that expands to the literal value of prompt1, not to the value that prompt1 would expand to: 55432 13devel 11214=# \set PROMPT2 'hello %:PROMPT1: bye' 55432 13devel 11214=# select<Enter> hello %[%033[35m%]%> %:VERSION_NAME: %p%[%033[0m%]%R%# bye -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:58:38PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:06:08PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 09:47:01AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > > > > > How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) > > > > > > that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? > > > > This seems way too specific to me. I like the "circumfix" directive > > > better, because it allows one to do more things. I don't have any > > > immediate use for it, but it doesn't seem completely far-fetched that > > > there are some. > > > So something like %w[...%w] where people could put things like PROMPT1 > > inside? > > Hmm, (I'm not sure your proposed syntax works, but let's assume that > it does.) I'm saying you'd define > \set PROMPT1 '%a%b%c ' > \set PROMPT2 '%w[%a%b%c %w]' > > and you'd end up with matching indentation on multiline queries. > > I'm not sure that we'd need to make something like this work: > PROMPT1="%w[$PROMPT1%w]" > which I think is what you're saying. PROMPT2="%w[$PROMPT1%w]", and basically yes. > We already have "%:PROMPT1:" but that expands to the literal value of > prompt1, not to the value that prompt1 would expand to: Yeah, that's not so great for this usage. I guess "expand variables" could be a separate useful feature (and patch) all by itself... Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
At Wed, 13 Nov 2019 20:57:04 +0100, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote in > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:58:38PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:06:08PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > > On 2019-Nov-13, David Fetter wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 09:47:01AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > How about a circumfix directive (like the existing %[ ... %]) > > > > > > > that replaces everything inside with whitespace, but keeps the width? > > > > > > This seems way too specific to me. I like the "circumfix" directive > > > > better, because it allows one to do more things. I don't have any > > > > immediate use for it, but it doesn't seem completely far-fetched that > > > > there are some. > > > > > So something like %w[...%w] where people could put things like PROMPT1 > > > inside? > > > > Hmm, (I'm not sure your proposed syntax works, but let's assume that > > it does.) I'm saying you'd define > > \set PROMPT1 '%a%b%c ' > > \set PROMPT2 '%w[%a%b%c %w]' > > > > and you'd end up with matching indentation on multiline queries. This seems assuming %x are a kind of stable (until semicolon) function. But at least %`..` can be volatile. So, I think the %w thing in PROMPT2 should be able to refer the actual prompt string resulted from PROMPT1. > > I'm not sure that we'd need to make something like this work: > > PROMPT1="%w[$PROMPT1%w]" > > which I think is what you're saying. > > PROMPT2="%w[$PROMPT1%w]", and basically yes. Like this. Or may be a bit too-much and I don't came up with a lialistic use-case, but I think of the following syntax. \set PROMPT1 '%w[%a%b%c%w] ' \set PROMPT2 '%w ' where %w in PROMPT2 is replaced by a whitespace with the same length to the output of %w[..%w] part in PROMPT1. > > We already have "%:PROMPT1:" but that expands to the literal value of > > prompt1, not to the value that prompt1 would expand to: > > Yeah, that's not so great for this usage. I guess "expand variables" > could be a separate useful feature (and patch) all by itself... +1. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
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
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 3:58 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > 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. Nice idea. Here's one like that, that just does the counting at the end and looks out for readline control codes. It's pretty naive about what "width" means though: you'll get two spaces for UTF-8 encoded é, and I suppose a complete implementation would know about the half width/full width thing for Chinese and Japanese etc.
Attachment
On 2019-Nov-18, Thomas Munro wrote: > Nice idea. Here's one like that, that just does the counting at the > end and looks out for readline control codes. It's pretty naive about > what "width" means though: you'll get two spaces for UTF-8 encoded é, > and I suppose a complete implementation would know about the half > width/full width thing for Chinese and Japanese etc. Hmm ... is this related to what Juan José posted at https://postgr.es/m/CAC+AXB28ADgwdNRA=aAoWDYPqO1DZR+5NTO8iXGSsFrXyVpqYQ@mail.gmail.com ? That's backend code of course, though. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:49 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2019-Nov-18, Thomas Munro wrote: > > Nice idea. Here's one like that, that just does the counting at the > > end and looks out for readline control codes. It's pretty naive about > > what "width" means though: you'll get two spaces for UTF-8 encoded é, > > and I suppose a complete implementation would know about the half > > width/full width thing for Chinese and Japanese etc. > > Hmm ... is this related to what Juan José posted at > https://postgr.es/m/CAC+AXB28ADgwdNRA=aAoWDYPqO1DZR+5NTO8iXGSsFrXyVpqYQ@mail.gmail.com > ? That's backend code of course, though. Yeah. Maybe pg_wcswidth() would be OK though, and it's available in psql, though I guess you'd have to make a copy with the escaped bits stripped out.
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:49 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 2019-Nov-18, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>> Nice idea. Here's one like that, that just does the counting at the
>>> end and looks out for readline control codes. It's pretty naive about
>>> what "width" means though: you'll get two spaces for UTF-8 encoded é,
>>> and I suppose a complete implementation would know about the half
>>> width/full width thing for Chinese and Japanese etc.
> Yeah. Maybe pg_wcswidth() would be OK though, and it's available in
> psql, though I guess you'd have to make a copy with the escaped bits
> stripped out.
Right, you should use pg_wcswidth() or the underlying PQdsplen() function
to compute display width. The latter might be more convenient since
you could apply it character by character rather than making a copy
of the string.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 6:21 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > > Yeah. Maybe pg_wcswidth() would be OK though, and it's available in > > psql, though I guess you'd have to make a copy with the escaped bits > > stripped out. > > Right, you should use pg_wcswidth() or the underlying PQdsplen() function > to compute display width. The latter might be more convenient since > you could apply it character by character rather than making a copy > of the string. Right, a PQdsplen()/PQmblen() loop works nicely, as attached. I spotted a potential problem: I suppose I could write a PROMPT1 that includes an invalid multibyte sequence at the end of the buffer and trick PQmblen() or PQdsplen() into reading a few bytes past the end. Two defences against that would be (1) use pg_encoding_verifymb() instead of PQmblen() and (2) use pg_encoding_max_length() to make sure you can't get close enough to the end of the buffer, but neither of those functions are available to psql.
Attachment
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> Right, a PQdsplen()/PQmblen() loop works nicely, as attached.
> I spotted a potential problem: I suppose I could write a PROMPT1 that
> includes an invalid multibyte sequence at the end of the buffer and
> trick PQmblen() or PQdsplen() into reading a few bytes past the end.
> Two defences against that would be (1) use pg_encoding_verifymb()
> instead of PQmblen() and (2) use pg_encoding_max_length() to make sure
> you can't get close enough to the end of the buffer, but neither of
> those functions are available to psql.
You should follow the logic in pg_wcswidth: compute PQmblen() first,
and bail out if it's more than the remaining string length, otherwise
it's ok to apply PQdsplen().
It might be a good idea to explicitly initialize last_prompt1_width to
zero, for clarity.
Should the user docs explicitly say "of the same width as the most recent
output of PROMPT1", as you have in the comments? That seems a more
precise specification, and it will eliminate some questions people will
otherwise ask.
LGTM otherwise.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:09 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > You should follow the logic in pg_wcswidth: compute PQmblen() first, > and bail out if it's more than the remaining string length, otherwise > it's ok to apply PQdsplen(). Got it. I was worried that it wasn't safe to call even PQmblen(), because I didn't know a fact about all encodings: as described in the comment of pg_gb18030_mblen(), all implementations read only the first byte to determine the length, except for GB18030 which reads the second byte too, and that's OK because there's always a null terminator. > It might be a good idea to explicitly initialize last_prompt1_width to > zero, for clarity. > > Should the user docs explicitly say "of the same width as the most recent > output of PROMPT1", as you have in the comments? That seems a more > precise specification, and it will eliminate some questions people will > otherwise ask. > > LGTM otherwise. Done, and pushed. I also skipped negative results from PQdsplen like pg_wcswidth() does (that oversight explained why a non-readline build showed the correct alignment for PROMPT1 '%[%033[1m%]%M %n@%/%R%[%033[0m%]%# ' by strange concindence). Thanks all for the feedback. I think the new bikeshed colour looks good.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 04:02:48PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:09 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > You should follow the logic in pg_wcswidth: compute PQmblen() first, > > and bail out if it's more than the remaining string length, otherwise > > it's ok to apply PQdsplen(). > > Got it. I was worried that it wasn't safe to call even PQmblen(), > because I didn't know a fact about all encodings: as described in the > comment of pg_gb18030_mblen(), all implementations read only the first > byte to determine the length, except for GB18030 which reads the > second byte too, and that's OK because there's always a null > terminator. > > > It might be a good idea to explicitly initialize last_prompt1_width to > > zero, for clarity. > > > > Should the user docs explicitly say "of the same width as the most recent > > output of PROMPT1", as you have in the comments? That seems a more > > precise specification, and it will eliminate some questions people will > > otherwise ask. > > > > LGTM otherwise. > > Done, and pushed. I also skipped negative results from PQdsplen like > pg_wcswidth() does (that oversight explained why a non-readline build > showed the correct alignment for PROMPT1 '%[%033[1m%]%M > %n@%/%R%[%033[0m%]%# ' by strange concindence). > > Thanks all for the feedback. I think the new bikeshed colour looks good. Please find attached some polka dots for the bike shed :) Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Attachment
Hi,
I noticed that this patch does not work when PROMPT1 contains a new line, since the whole length of PROMPT1 is taken into account for the length of %w.
Attached screenshot shows the issue on my psql, with the following PROMPT variables (colors edited out for readability):
\set PROMPT1 '\n[pid:%p] %n :: %`hostname`:%> ‹%/› \n› '
\set PROMPT2 '%w'
Notice in the screenshot that just after inputting a newline, my cursor is far to the right.
The length of %w should probably be computed starting from the last newline in PROMPT1.
I could technically get rid of my newline, but since my prompt can get pretty long, i like the comfort of having my first line of sql start right at the left of my terminal.
Also attached is a trivial patch to fix this issue, which I have not extensively tested (works for me at least), and might not be the right way to do it, but it's a start.
Otherwise, nice feature, I like it!
Regards,
Maxence
Attachment
Maxence Ahlouche <maxence.ahlouche@gmail.com> writes:
> The length of %w should probably be computed starting from the last newline
> in PROMPT1.
Good idea, but I think you need to account for "visible" (ie, if the
newline is inside RL_PROMPT_START_IGNORE, it shouldn't change the width).
It might be best to add logic inside the existing "if (visible)" instead
of making a new top-level case.
Another special case that somebody's likely to whine about is \t, though
to handle that we'd have to make assumptions about the tab stop distance.
Maybe assuming that it's 8 is good enough.
regards, tom lane
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:09, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Good idea, but I think you need to account for "visible" (ie, if the
newline is inside RL_PROMPT_START_IGNORE, it shouldn't change the width).
It might be best to add logic inside the existing "if (visible)" instead
of making a new top-level case.
Right, I assumed that it was safe given that only terminal control characters were invisible.
Since the title of the terminal window can be changed as well via control characters, it's probably better not to make that assumption.
I updated the patch accordingly.
Another special case that somebody's likely to whine about is \t, though
to handle that we'd have to make assumptions about the tab stop distance.
Maybe assuming that it's 8 is good enough.
The problem with tabs is that any user can set their tabstops to whatever they want, and a tab doesn't have a fixed width, it just goes up to the next tab stop.
One way to do it would be to add tabs wherever necessary in prompt2 to make sure they have the same size as in prompt1 (a list of numbers of spaces, which we would concatenate with a tab?), but I'm not sure it's worth the effort.
Attachment
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 5:43 AM Maxence Ahlouche <maxence.ahlouche@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:09, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Good idea, but I think you need to account for "visible" (ie, if the >> newline is inside RL_PROMPT_START_IGNORE, it shouldn't change the width). >> It might be best to add logic inside the existing "if (visible)" instead >> of making a new top-level case. > > Right, I assumed that it was safe given that only terminal control characters were invisible. > Since the title of the terminal window can be changed as well via control characters, it's probably better not to makethat assumption. > > I updated the patch accordingly. Pushed. Thanks!