| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: more practical view on function's source code |
| Date: | 2010-03-22 21:23:43 |
| Message-ID: | 1269293023.14588.10.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On sön, 2010-03-21 at 20:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > \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?
>
> Well, in vi you can just do "vi +linenum filename".
I think that's a pretty widely spread convention. A quick test shows
that all of emacs, vi, joe, and nano support this. Of course there are
editors that don't support it, so we'll have to distinguish that
somehow, but it won't be too complicated to support a few of the common
editors.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-03-22 21:31:31 | Re: xmlconcat (was 9.0 release notes done) |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-03-22 21:18:04 | Re: 9.0 release notes done |