| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless |
| Date: | 2016-11-30 06:46:58 |
| Message-ID: | 18017.1480488418@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 01:10:06PM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> If there is a negative condition syntax, I would slightly prefer \ifnot to
>> \if_not or worse \unless. I would disaprove strongly of \unless because it
>> looses the clear symmetry with a closing \fi.
> I take it \sselnu is right out.
[ splorf... ] But really, \fi is something that could only be loved
by a certain academic breed of hackers. I'd go for \endif, probably.
That still doesn't relate well with \unless, so +1 for \if, \ifnot,
\else, and \endif.
I'm not really convinced that we need an \elseif at this point.
It could be added later if people find it compelling, but I'm
having a hard time believing that it's essential.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-11-30 07:01:43 | Re: Random number generation, take two |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2016-11-30 06:05:02 | Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless |