On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:15:07AM +0200, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 at 08:23, Anthonin Bonnefoy > <anthonin.bonne...@datadoghq.com> wrote: >> Since \bind_named is also new, we can also rename it to make it >> consistent with close meta-command. So what about renaming \bind_named >> to \bindprepared and \close to \closeprepared? > > I think I still prefer \bind_named or maybe \bindnamed (depending on > what our policy for underscores in \ commands is).
Not sure that there is such a policy in place. I find names with underscores easier to parse. > For that command it > should differentiate from the already existing \bind command, which is > also for prepared statements, just not for "named" prepared > statements. While close needs to differentiate from close for portals > vs close for prepared statements. Good point. I would be on board with a \close_prepared then, if that's the consensus we reach, without touching at \bind_named. We still have time to decide on the name until the release, just let's make sure to not do a rename multiple times. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
