Re: proposal: more practical view on function's source code

2010/3/21 Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>:
> On 21/03/2010 10:33 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> 2010/3/21 Craig Ringer<craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>:
>>>
>>> On 21/03/2010 8:03 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello
>>>>
>>>> Current form of function detail isn't too practical (see screenshot 1)
>>>>
>>>> we can move source code to separate area (maybe we can add rownumbers)
>>>>
>>>> see screenshot 2 (it is only mockup, real implementation can be more
>>>> inteligent in rows numbering)
>>>
>>> Ideally, the output of the source listing could be used as input to
>>> CREATE
>>> OR REPLACE FUNCTION without excessive massaging. Those line number
>>> prefixes
>>> make it hard to grab the output of \df+ and do something useful with it.
>>
>> there is \ef statement now
>
> ... which I completely missed. My apologies; that problem is already solved.

:)

Pavel
>
> --
> Craig Ringer
>