On 21 Nov 2009, at 02:56, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> Would a patch that changes that have any chance of being accepted? Or is
>> the gain (not having to repeat the DEFAULT clause, and being able to
>> maintain it at one place instead of many) considered too small compared
>> to the risk of breaking existing code?
>
> I don't think there's a lot of risk of code breakage; few people use
> domains, fewer use them with defaults, and you might be the only one
> using them as variable types. And there are going to be more
> substantial backwards compat issues with the lexer changes anyway. As
> long as we remember to flag the compatibility issue in the release
> notes, I don't see it as a problem.
we use domains with defaults, a lot. That's one of the purposes of domains, to have certain type, constraint, and
default.