Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lb4Ms-0000Ka-GA for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:45:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lb4Mr-00019G-A3 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:45:53 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lb4Mr-000199-4G for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:45:53 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lb4Md-0007pM-1X for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 16:45:52 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 13QGjYEo2266337; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:45:34 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Bruce Momjian cc: Noah Misch , neverov.max@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular In-reply-to: <20210426163116.GR7629@momjian.us> References: <16939-cceeb03fb72736ee@postgresql.org> <20210323160336.GE579@momjian.us> <20210425115726.GA2353095@rfd.leadboat.com> <20210426163116.GR7629@momjian.us> Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian message dated "Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:31:16 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2266335.1619455533.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 12:45:34 -0400 Message-ID: <2266336.1619455534@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Bruce Momjian writes: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 04:57:26AM -0700, Noah Misch wrote: >> Let's not change from one popular spelling to another when doing so cre= ates a >> compatibility hazard. That is to say, I think PostgreSQL would be bett= er with >> this patch reverted. >> = >> If we did want to standardize on singular for -1, EVALUATE_MESSAGE_PLUR= AL() >> would be a key bit of code to change. > Oh, good point. I think we should just pick one and be consistent --- I > don't care which we choose. I agree with Noah's opinion that we should stick to the historical behavior in the interval I/O functions. There is not enough solidity in the "this is grammatically wrong" argument to justify taking any risk of application breakage, and it seems like there is some risk of that there. For the sorts of human-readable messages that EVALUATE_MESSAGE_PLURAL tends to be used for, I don't think there's a reason to worry that we might break applications if we change it. So I don't have a strong opinion about what to do there. Still, by the same token that the grammatical argument is weak, I lean towards not spending effort on changing it. regards, tom lane