Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 12:49:32 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan@nataraj.su>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
	Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru>,
	PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][PROPOSAL] Add enum releation option type
Message-ID: <20180307154932.bry7bakpr5thsswy@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <12291633.PFnvXaAOpE@x200m>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170306-137-4415bd-dirty (1.8.0)
Precedence: bulk

Nikolay Shaplov wrote:

> Actually that's me who have lost it.

Yeah, I realized today when I saw your reply to Nikita.  I didn't
realize it was him submitting a new version of the patch.

> The code with  oxford comma would be a 
> bit more complicated. We should put such coma when we have 3+ items and do not 
> put it when we have 2.
> 
> Does it worth it?
> 
> As I've read oxford using of comma is not mandatory and used to avoid 
> ambiguity.
> "XXX, YYY and ZZZ" can be read as "XXX, YYY, ZZZ" or as "XXX, (YYY and ZZZ)".
> oxford comma is used to make sure that YYY and ZZZ are separate items of the 
> list, not an expression inside one item.
> 
> But here we hardly have such ambiguity.

Gracious goodness -- the stuff these Brits come up with!

> So I'll ask again, do you really think it worth it?

I'm not qualified to answer this question.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services