On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 07:40:31AM -0500, Greg Smith wrote: > David Fetter wrote: > >That we're in the position of having prevN_wd for N = 1..5 as the > >current code exists is a sign that we need to refactor the whole > >thing, as you've suggested before. > > > >I'll work up a design and prototype for this by this weekend. > > Great. I don't think issues around tab completion are enough to > block the next alpha though, and it sounds like the next stage of > this needs to gel a bit more before it will be ready to commit > anyway. I'm going to mark the remaining bits here as returned for > now, and trust that you'll continue chugging away on this so we can > get it into the next CF early.
Will chug. "By this weekend" may have been a touch optimistic. "This weekend" seems a little more realistic :) Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
