On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 02:18:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 07:58:04PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 18.08.22 20:10, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Thus:
> > > > Strictly speaking, this process is iteration, but
> > > > RECURSIVE
> > > > is the terminology
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 07:58:04PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 18.08.22 20:10, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Thus:
> > > Strictly speaking, this process is iteration, but
> > > RECURSIVE
> > > is the terminology chosen by the SQL standards committee."
> > >
> > > Because the above sounds
On 18.08.22 20:10, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Thus:
Strictly speaking, this process is iteration, but RECURSIVE
is the terminology chosen by the SQL standards committee."
Because the above sounds just fine, I'd argue that if one does leave "not
recursion" it should be set off by a comma.
I went with
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 06:41:54PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 2:33 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Drew DeVault writes:
> > Minor grammatical fix.
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure that reads any better than before.
>
> >
> > - Strictly speaking, this
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 06:41:54PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 2:33 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... although I think this text is mine, so naturally I'd think
>> that. Anyone else have an opinion?
>
> If I read that aloud to myself there is a comma after iteration.
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 2:33 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Drew DeVault writes:
> > Minor grammatical fix.
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure that reads any better than before.
>
> >
> > -Strictly speaking, this process is iteration not recursion, but
> > +Strictly speaking, this process is iteration,
Drew DeVault writes:
> Minor grammatical fix.
Hmm, I'm not sure that reads any better than before.
>
> -Strictly speaking, this process is iteration not recursion, but
> +Strictly speaking, this process is iteration, not recursion, but
> RECURSIVE is the terminology chosen by
