On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 09:29:50PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ah, right, now that you mention it, 56b1e88c8 did this same fix
> before. This way is fine with me.
Oh, I haven't noticed this one. Pushed the bits to take care of the
compiler warnings, for now.
> I didn't review the error message changes closely. I do wonder if
> some of them are can't-happen cases that could just use an elog()
> instead of a translatable message.
Some of them are, yes. However, they are also worded with the same
format as some of the legit cases. So they don't add any extra
workload on the translation side as far as I recall, and I've been
fond of the errdetail part to get a consistent style across the board.
I'll double-check the whole a bit later, attached is the rest of them.
Corey, any comments about these?
--
Michael