Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Corey Huinker
Тема Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)
Дата
Msg-id CADkLM=dqO2G9yLtDB9PdJqyySau+EYFS1ypK5SSthya7yLEg2w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)  (Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Ah, I see why *that* wants to know about it ... I think.  I suppose you're
arguing that variable expansion shouldn't be able to insert, say, an \else
in a non-active branch?  Maybe, but if it can insert an \else in an active
branch, then why not non-active too?  Seems a bit inconsistent.

The major reason was avoiding situations like what Daniel showed: where value of a variable that is meaningless/undefined in the current false-block context gets expanded anyway, and thus code inside a false block has effects outside of that block. Granted, his example was contrived. I'm open to removing that feature and seeing what breaks in the test cases.

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless)
Следующее
От: Pritam Baral
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Index usage for elem-contained-by-const-range clauses