On Wed, 2002-08-28 at 10:24, Robert Treat wrote: > On Wed, 2002-08-28 at 10:11, Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Larry Rosenman wrote: > > >> Why? If both old and new are acceptable, why not document it? > > >> (Just curious, I'm not wedded to it). > > > > > Well, showing both versions adds confusion for no good reason, > > > > Yes, particularly considering that LIMIT ... FOR UPDATE corresponds > > to the implementation behavior (LIMIT acts before FOR UPDATE) while > > FOR UPDATE ... LIMIT does not. > > > > I concur with documenting only the preferred form (though there should > > be a note in gram.y explaining that we're supporting the old syntax > > for backward compatibility). > > > > Doesn't the need for a note explaining that we're supporting the old > syntax say to you that the documentation also needs to say we support > the old syntax? I can see the bug reports now saying "this is clearly > not what it says in the docs"...
Yes, both should be documented. But mark the non-preferred version as depreciated and disappearing soon (whether it does or not is another story) but discourage people from using it. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
