Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2266336.1619455534@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 04:57:26AM -0700, Noah Misch wrote: >> Let's not change from one popular spelling to another when doing so creates a >> compatibility hazard. That is to say, I think PostgreSQL would be better with >> this patch reverted. >> >> If we did want to standardize on singular for -1, EVALUATE_MESSAGE_PLURAL() >> would be a key bit of code to change. > Oh, good point. I think we should just pick one and be consistent --- I > don't care which we choose. I agree with Noah's opinion that we should stick to the historical behavior in the interval I/O functions. There is not enough solidity in the "this is grammatically wrong" argument to justify taking any risk of application breakage, and it seems like there is some risk of that there. For the sorts of human-readable messages that EVALUATE_MESSAGE_PLURAL tends to be used for, I don't think there's a reason to worry that we might break applications if we change it. So I don't have a strong opinion about what to do there. Still, by the same token that the grammatical argument is weak, I lean towards not spending effort on changing it. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: