Re: psql patch (2)

Patch applied. Thanks.

I have attached the patch. I adjusted the cancelConn functions.

I also adjusted this:

+ char parse_char(char **buf)
+ {
+ long l;
+
+ l = strtol(*buf, buf, 0);
+ (*buf)--;
+ return (char)l;
+ }
+

I added the parens around 'buf' because the compiler was saying
statement has no effect. Is this correct?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote:
> I'm continuing to work on cleaning up code in psql. As things appear
> now, my changes seem to work. Some possible minor bugs got squished
> on the way but I can't be sure without more feedback from people who
> really put the code to the test.
>
> The new patch mostly simplifies variable handling and reduces code
> duplication. Changes in the command parser eliminate some redundant
> variables (boolean state + depth counter), replaces some
> "else if" constructs with switches, and so on. It is meant to be
> applied together with my previous patch, although I hope they don't
> conflict; I went back to the CVS version for this one.
>
> One more thing I thought should perhaps be changed: an IGNOREEOF
> value of n will ignore only n-1 EOFs. I didn't want to touch this
> for fear of breaking existing applications, but it does seem a tad
> illogical.
>
>
> Jeroen
>

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073