Re: GUC names in messages
От | Nathan Bossart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GUC names in messages |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20231107145821.GA779199@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GUC names in messages (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: GUC names in messages
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 10:33:03AM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2023-Nov-01, Nathan Bossart wrote: >> +1, IMHO quoting GUC names makes it abundantly clear that they are special >> identifiers. In de4d456, we quoted the role names in a bunch of messages. >> We didn't quote the attribute/option names, but those are in all-caps, so >> they already stand out nicely. > > I like this, and I propose we codify it in the message style guide. How > about this? We can start looking at code changes to make once we decide > we agree with this. > + <para> > + In messages containing configuration variable names, quotes are > + not necessary when the names are visibly not English natural words, such > + as when they have underscores or are all-uppercase. Otherwise, quotes > + must be added. Do include double-quotes in a message where an arbitrary > + variable name is to be expanded. > + </para> І'd vote for quoting all GUC names, if for no other reason than "visibly not English natural words" feels a bit open to interpretation. But this seems like it's on the right track, so I won't argue too strongly if I'm the only holdout. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: