From: | Roberto Mello <rmello(at)cc(dot)usu(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [DOCS] 7.4 official docs : Fonts? |
Date: | 2003-11-20 17:31:08 |
Message-ID: | 20031120173107.GA3050@cc.usu.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-www |
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 12:16:58PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> > When I was experimenting with different color schemes, I thought about
> > perhaps matching the syntax coloring of my editor, BBEdit. However, I'm
> > sure not all editors use the same color scheme (the ANSI SQL language
> > module for BBEdit displays only blue (keywords), pink (strings), and
> > black (everything else). The blue would conflict with the current link
> > color, and I'd rather not use pink unless everyone else thinks it's a
> > good idea.) I'm interested in hearing what editors others use for
> > coding, and what syntax coloring schemes they use for SQL.
I use vim, it has good SQL coloring syntax. The one problem that I'd like
to fix in it is that the body of PL/pgSQL functions are shown as a big
string.
-Roberto
--
+----| Roberto Mello - http://www.brasileiro.net/ |------+
+ Computer Science Graduate Student, Utah State University +
+ USU Free Software & GNU/Linux Club - http://fslc.usu.edu/ +
YES!! eh, NO!!! oh, well MAYBE!!!!!!!!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2003-11-20 17:43:23 | Re: [DOCS] 7.4 official docs : Fonts? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-11-20 17:16:58 | Re: [DOCS] 7.4 official docs : Fonts? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2003-11-20 17:43:23 | Re: [DOCS] 7.4 official docs : Fonts? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-11-20 17:16:58 | Re: [DOCS] 7.4 official docs : Fonts? |