From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
cc: Francisco Olarte <folarte@peoplecall.com>, doekman@icloud.com,
        PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: BUG #17550: inet type doesn't accept alternate notations of ipv4
 addresses
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKFQuwbuVC2m-f1L7wOZWhd51Ze_RseJrmY1F_+BX3+wf3Cx3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17550-277c0ecd43597da9@postgresql.org>
 <CA+bJJbzk3yy=E--mn=aZcxMfBikB+bhMU0PyTtdyMR0Og-z3qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKFQuwbuVC2m-f1L7wOZWhd51Ze_RseJrmY1F_+BX3+wf3Cx3A@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
	message dated "Thu, 14 Jul 2022 11:02:03 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2996116.1657823049.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 14:24:09 -0400
Message-ID: <2996117.1657823049@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2996117.1657823049%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> I don't see it as unreasonable to claim the lack of documentation regarding
> known alternative representations that could be accepted as input is a
> bug.  The actual report isn't even asking for us to implement acceptance of
> those formats, just make it clear when someone gets that error and checks
> the docs that the error is valid.

Yeah.  I'm disinclined to loosen the input syntax rules, but the docs
could stand improvement I think.  Particularly since there are no
concrete examples in

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/datatype-net-types.html#DATATYPE-INET

but there are in the following section about CIDR --- and that type
*does* allow some forms of abbreviation.  It would not be unreasonable
to assume that INET does too.

			regards, tom lane