On 04/18/2012 10:03 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On ons, 2012-04-18 at 09:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut<pete...@gmx.net> writes:
My vote is to revert this altogether and leave it be. In the
alternative, make it an error.
You mean in HEAD too? I don't agree with that, for sure. What this
patch is accomplishing is to make sure that the less-commonly-used
programs have similar command-line-parsing behavior to psql and pg_dump,
where we long ago realized that failure to check this carefully could
result in very confusing behavior. (Especially on machines where
getopt is willing to rearrange the command line.)
OK, if you care strongly about that, make it an error. But don't just
ignore things.
It won't be ignored. It will be caught by the "too many arguments" logic.
The case where repeated arguments should be disallowed is a similar but
different case that probably demands a much larger patch. I don't think
its existence militates against this fix, however.
I agree with Andrew that this is a bug fix. I can see the argument
for not applying it to back branches, but not for declaring that it's
not a bug.
We shouldn't be backpatching things that are merely confusing. It works
as designed at the time, after all. Improvements belong in master.
If it was really intended to work this way then that's a piece of very
poor design, IMNSHO. It looks to me much more like it was just an
oversight.
I don't have terribly strong feelings about this, since we've not had
lots of complaints over the years, so I'll revert it in the back branches.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
