Re: [PGdocs] fix description for handling pf non-ASCII characters
От | Karl O. Pinc |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PGdocs] fix description for handling pf non-ASCII characters |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e2a148d9-3f2c-4a86-b493-35c41ed75e93@karlpinc.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PGdocs] fix description for handling pf non-ASCII characters (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Sep 26, 2023 1:10:55 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > "Karl O. Pinc" <kop@karlpinc.com> writes: >> For the last hunk you'd change around "anything". Write: >> "... it will be truncated to less than NAMEDATALEN characters and >> the bytes of the string which are not printable ASCII characters ...". > >> Notice that I have also changed "that" to "which" just above. >> I _think_ this is better English. > > No, I'm pretty sure you're mistaken. It's been a long time since > high school English, but the way I think this works is that "that" > introduces a restrictive clause, which narrows the scope of what > you are saying. That is, you say "that" when you want to talk > about only the bytes of the string that aren't ASCII. But "which" > introduces a non-restrictive clause that adds information or > commentary. If you say "bytes of the string which are not ASCII", > you are effectively making a side assertion that no byte of the > string is ASCII. Which is not the meaning you want here. Makes sense to me. "That" it is. Thanks for the help. I never would have figured that out.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: