To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bret Hughes <bhughes@elevating.com>,
	Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>,
	postgresql sql list <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: trigger/for key help
References: <1081662204.6609.72.camel@bretsony>
	<20040411080932.Q83278@megazone.bigpanda.com>
	<1081711155.6399.165.camel@bretsony> <17189.1081720813@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<1081724318.2628.20.camel@bretsony> <28212.1081736841@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <28212.1081736841@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Organization: The Emacs Conspiracy; member since 1992
Date: 13 Apr 2004 02:20:00 -0400
Message-ID: <873c78e6wf.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
Lines: 26
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

> Bret Hughes <bhughes@elevating.com> writes:
> > FWIW I tried to use alter table but could never get the parser to accept
> > $1 as a constraint name.  I used single and double quotes as well as a
> > lame attempt \$1.
> 
> Hm, "$1" works for me ...

Hm, this reminds me. When I was first learning this stuff I was stymied by the
same issue. It took me quite a while to figure out how to drop constraints
because of the quoting issue.

Of course now it seems obvious, but for someone just starting it adds another
roadblock. Is there a reason postgres goes out of its way to pick names that
will be harder to work with than necessary?

Or is it considered a good thing on the theory that if it's hard to reference
it's also hard to accidentally use such names in conflicting ways?

Perhaps names like _1 _2 ... would be easier to handle? 
Or perhaps making $ not require quoting would be helpful?

-- 
greg