public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
To: Peter Smith <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: GUC names in messages
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 10:43:50 +0900
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHut+Pu91ik+U1ffV4e9a7R_aHFdqNrF8mBJ4FYtPfo8oDL6Yw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAHut+Pu91ik+U1ffV4e9a7R_aHFdqNrF8mBJ4FYtPfo8oDL6Yw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 10:04:35AM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 8:53 PM Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yeah. Also, these could be changed to have the GUC name outside the
>> message proper, which would reduce the total number of messages. (But
>> care must be given to the word "the" there.)
>
> I had posted something similar a few posts back [1], but it just
> caused more questions unrelated to GUC name quotes so I abandoned that
> temporarily.
Yes, I kind of agree to let that out of the picture for the moment.
It would be good to reduce the translation chunks.
> So for now, I hope this thread can be only about quotes on GUC names,
> otherwise, I thought it may become stuck debating dozens of individual
> messages. Certainly later, or in another thread, we can revisit all
> messages again to try to identify/extract any "common" ones.
-HINT: Perhaps you need a different "datestyle" setting.
+HINT: Perhaps you need a different DateStyle setting.
Is the change for "datestyle" really required? It does not betray the
GUC quoting policy added by 0001.
>> I think we could leave these improvements for a second round. They
>> don't need to hold back the improvement we already have.
>
> I tried something for this already but kept it in a separate patch. See v2-0003
+ if (*p == '_')
+ underscore = true;
Is there a reason why we don't just use islower() or is that just to
get something entirely local independent? I am not sure that it needs
to be that complicated. We should just check that all the characters
are lower-case and apply quotes.
--
Michael
Attachments:
[application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (833B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
download
view thread (4+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: GUC names in messages
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox