Re: BPCHAR description in 8.3. Character Types is misleading and incomplete
| От | Sergei Katkovsky |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BPCHAR description in 8.3. Character Types is misleading and incomplete |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAAf8Jy+49UAExghnssRR4oACSVGk7HejrU7GipdijWWBsbPt4Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BPCHAR description in 8.3. Character Types is misleading and incomplete ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BPCHAR description in 8.3. Character Types is misleading and incomplete
|
| Список | pgsql-docs |
On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 1:08 AM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I’m just trying to phrase the documentation for bpchar so that the “bp”, which stands for “blank-padded”, is justified. That's what I thought. Yes, unfortunately, bp stands for “blank-padded”, but this name is wrong and misleading. I don't know why it was chosen, maybe it was actually considered as blank-padded at that time, maybe it was an attempt to avoid introducing a new keyword (an ancient curse that has ruined a lot of good ideas already). It doesn't matter, though. That was a mistake in my opinion, but we don't have to repeat it. There is no need to justify wrongs. An honest remark (footnote, tip, whatever) in documentation "Although BP in BPCHAR stands for 'blank-padded', no padding is actually performed for this type" would be far better. > > I do understand the terminology confusion with the verb padding. And see why “trimmed” is actively confusing. The proseprobably needs to resolve this - and technically does from what I’m reading. > > You may wish to move on from critiquing my suggested changes and instead propose something concrete of your own. Providea third choice besides status-quo and my option. I already did this. It was my original request that started this discussion, and I suggested there, although more as a guide, "as-if-blank-trimmed" and "blank-ignoring". But then Jeff Davis prepared a patch and proposed "blank-insignificant" instead, which I support now (after that, I also suggested "blank-agnostic", but that was more of a joke). So, the third choice already exists, and there is even a patch implementing it. Of course, "blank-insignificant" is not perfect either, specifically, it's not immediately obvious that only trailing blanks are insignificant here. Perhaps a better term would be "trailing-blanks-insignificant", with or without hyphens. But in my opinion. both are much more appropriate and less misleading than either "blank-padded" or "blank-trimmed". > > Though I’m doubtful there is a nice precise hyphenated word to be found here for “treats any trailing spaces as being semanticallyinsignificant”. Yes, but nobody requires us to use such a word here. We can use a few more words if needed. With best regards, Sergei Katkovskii
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: