Re: BUG #5656: parameter 'client_min_messages' accept values not listed in enumvals

Tom Lane escreveu:
> ISTM your
> argument can be reduced to "there should be no hidden values ever", but
> I doubt we're going to buy that.
>
No, the "hidden values" has their use case (hiding legal values that we don't
want to expose, for example, true/false, 0/1, yes/no). My point is if they are
not useful let's rip them to not confuse people.


--
  Euler Taveira de Oliveira
  http://www.timbira.com/