2010/3/21 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> I'm not sure that Pavel's idea is the right way to attack the problem, >> but I don't agree with this either. Line numbers are really the only >> feasible way of identifying a position in a large function. I usually >> bring up the function source code in vi and then use j with a repeat >> count to find the offending line. It's not uncommon for me to have >> various places in the function that look somewhat similar, so >> expecting me to find the right place other than by the line number >> would not work very well for me. > > I'm certainly not proposing removing the line number from error > messages. I'm just saying that I see no value in the proposed psql \df > change for this purpose. > > The direction that we ought to be pushing in, I think, is the same as > the vision for syntax error handling: enable pgAdmin and similar tools > to pop up the function text with a cursor placed at (more or less) the > right place. It's interesting to think about how that might be extended > to lower-tech solutions like \ef. I could see telling people to type > \ef function-name line-number > with suitable magic to get the editor to place the cursor at that line. > I suspect this wouldn't be too hard to do with emacs --- what do you > think about vi?
Uff, why? - almost of time you don't need, you must not edit directly code of procedures. - startup time of text processor - this function will start on some specific editor, but pg allows to set any external editor - it isn't effective - really (I think it is too much chars). I prefer two or three chars shortcut Pavel > > regards, tom lane > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
