Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> BTW, at least in the usage in that loop, get_functiondef_dollarquote_tag
>> seems grossly overdesigned. �It would be clearer, shorter, and faster if
>> you just had a strncmp test for "AS $function" there.
> As far as I can see, the only purpose of that code is to support the
> desire to have \sf+ display **** rather than a line number for the
> lines that FOLLOW the function body. But I'm wondering if we should
> just forget about that and let the numbering run continuously from the
> first "AS $function" line to end of file. That would get rid of a
> bunch of rather grotty code in the \sf patch, also.
Oh? Considering that in the standard pg_get_functiondef output, the
ending $function$ delimiter is always on the very last line, that sounds
pretty useless. +1 for just numbering forward from the start line.
BTW, the last I looked, \sf+ was using what I thought to be a quite ugly
and poorly-considered formatting for the line number. I would suggest
eight blanks for a header line and "%-7d " as the prefix format for a
numbered line. The reason for making sure the prefix is 8 columns rather
than some other width is to not mess up tab-based formatting of the
function body. I would also prefer a lot more visual separation between
the line number and the code than "%4d " will offer; and as for the
stars, they're just useless and distracting.
regards, tom lane