Tom Lane wrote:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> I think calling it 'here-document' quoting is possibly unwise - it is
>> sufficiently different from here documents in shell and perl contexts to
>> make it confusing.
>
> I agree. I've tried to think of a better alternative name, but without
> much success.
>
>> We could call it meta-quoting, or alternative quoting, maybe.
>
> Those seem pretty unmemorable and content-free, though. Any other ideas
> out there?
textembed
markedtext
hereliteral
markedliteral
litter
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> PS: btw, I have realized that the seemingly obvious algorithm for
> choosing a delimiter string for given text is wrong. I had imagined it
> as "try $$, $Q$, $QQ$, $QQQ$, etc, until you find a delimiter not
> present in the given text string". This is not right because, for
> example, if the string ends with $Q then $Q$ is not a usable delimiter
> ($Q$...$Q$Q$ would be misparsed). The simplest correct algorithm is
> "try $, $Q, $QQ, $QQQ, etc until you find a string not present in the
> given text string; then use that with a $ appended".
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #