Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> Well, I think the practice of reporting C function names for
>> user-visible error messages isn't a particularly good idea -- but if
>> we'd like to fix that, this is only one of numerous error messages that
>> need to be corrected.
> Is there any desire for this to be done?
I am *strongly* against removing those names until such time as we have
a substitute mechanism for identifying where error messages come from
in the source. We've talked before about making __FILE__/__LINE__ info
available as a secondary field in error messages, as part of a general
overhaul of error reporting ... but no one seems to want to tackle it...
regards, tom lane