Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1indQR-0003Xw-Pj for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2020 07:00:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1indQP-0006YJ-5G for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2020 07:00:41 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1indQO-0006YC-Sa for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2020 07:00:40 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1indQI-0002Ys-4w for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2020 07:00:40 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 00470Tcx009257; Sat, 4 Jan 2020 02:00:29 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Geoghegan cc: Robert Haas , Christoph Berg , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: pgsql: Add basic TAP tests for psql's tab-completion logic. In-reply-to: References: <20200103170226.GB32629@msg.df7cb.de> <26339.1578072930@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20200103174839.GD32629@msg.df7cb.de> <22669.1578104202@sss.pgh.pa.us> <25298.1578106280@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3055.1578115809@sss.pgh.pa.us> <8038.1578119995@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan message dated "Fri, 03 Jan 2020 22:49:02 -0800" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <9255.1578121229.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2020 02:00:29 -0500 Message-ID: <9256.1578121229@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 10:39 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> Attached is a blind attempt to fix this by allowing escape >> sequence(s) instead of spaces between the words. Does this >> work for you? > I'm afraid not; no apparent change. No change in the "Actual output > was" line, either. Meh. I must be too tired to get the regexp syntax right. Will try tomorrow. regards, tom lane