[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9585?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14736591#comment-14736591
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-9585:
---------------------------------------------
bq. I think that it is ok to change the syntax as it is fully backward
compatible.
It is, adding new syntax is acceptable in a minor release. That said, this
should ideally imply a minor bump of the CQL version number, in both
{{QueryProcessor}} and in the doc (with ideally an entry in the changelog at
the end of the doc).
You also have a typo in the {{NEWS}} file, and something like "The syntax
TRUNCATE TABLE X is now accepted as an alias for TRUNCATE X" would be a tad
more informative.
> Make "truncate table X" an alias for "truncate X"
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-9585
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9585
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: J.B. Langston
> Assignee: Benjamin Lerer
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 2.1.x
>
> Attachments: 9585-2.1-V2.txt, 9585-2.1.txt
>
>
> CQL syntax is inconsistent: it's "drop table X" but "truncate X". It used to
> trip me up all the time until I wrapped my brain around this inconsistency
> and it still triggers a tiny bout of OCD every time I type it. I realize
> it's too late to change it, but why not have both? "truncate table X" is
> also consistent with the syntax in SQL.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
