From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: proposal: a width specification for s specifier (format function), fix behave when positional and ordered placeholders are used |
Date: | 2013-01-31 20:43:24 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRC0pYF4pAa4N=OVCwHLLJ-Mj4YxhJ+_OU0iZS8EnLzbhw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello
2013/1/29 Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On 29 January 2013 08:19, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> * The width field is optional, even if the '-' flag is specified. So
>> '%-s' is perfectly legal and should be interpreted as '%s'. The
>> current implementation treats it as a width of 0, which is wrong.
>>
>
> Oh, but of course a width of 0 is the same as no width at all, so the
> current code is correct after all. That's what happens if I try to
> write emails before I've had my caffeine :-)
>
> I think my other points remain valid though. It would still be neater
> to parse the flags separately from the width field, and then all
> literal numbers that appear in the format should be positive.
I am sending rewritten code
It indirect width "*" and "*n$" is supported. It needs little bit more code.
There are a new question
what should be result of
format(">>%2$*1$s<<", NULL, "hello")
???
raise exception now, but I am able to modify to some agreement
Regards
Pavel
>
> Regards,
> Dean
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
format_width_20130131.patch | application/octet-stream | 17.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-01-31 20:49:36 | Re: Privileges for INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SCHEMATA (was Re: Small clarification in "34.41. schemata") |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-01-31 20:41:21 | Re: backend hangs at immediate shutdown (Re: Back-branch update releases coming in a couple weeks) |