On 07/16/2013 03:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
>> On 07/09/2013 01:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Where are we with this patch? Fabien, are you going to submit an
updated version which addresses the objections, or should I mark it
Returned With Feedback?
>
>>> There is
Josh Berkus writes:
> On 07/09/2013 01:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>>> Where are we with this patch? Fabien, are you going to submit an
>>> updated version which addresses the objections, or should I mark it
>>> Returned With Feedback?
>> There is no need for an updated patch. I addressed the ob
On 07/09/2013 01:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> Where are we with this patch? Fabien, are you going to submit an
>> updated version which addresses the objections, or should I mark it
>> Returned With Feedback?
>
> There is no need for an updated patch. I addressed the objections with
> words, no
> >> Generally speaking, I agree with Robert's objection. The patch in
> >> itself adds only one unnecessary keyword, which probably wouldn't be
> >> noticeable, but the argument for it implies that we should be willing
> >> to add a lot more equally-unnecessary keywords, which I'm not. gram.o
>
Hello Josh,
Generally speaking, I agree with Robert's objection. The patch in
itself adds only one unnecessary keyword, which probably wouldn't be
noticeable, but the argument for it implies that we should be willing
to add a lot more equally-unnecessary keywords, which I'm not. gram.o
is alr
On 06/24/2013 06:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> What about simply not using a keyword at that location at all? Something
>> like the attached hack?
> Generally speaking, I agree with Robert's objection. The patch in
> itself adds only one unnecessary keyword, which probably wou
On 2013-06-24 09:55:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > What about simply not using a keyword at that location at all? Something
> > like the attached hack?
>
> "Hack" is much too polite a word for that. This will for example fail
> to respect the difference between quoted and
Andres Freund writes:
> What about simply not using a keyword at that location at all? Something
> like the attached hack?
"Hack" is much too polite a word for that. This will for example fail
to respect the difference between quoted and unquoted words. If the
argument for this patch is to make
Le lundi 24 juin 2013 11:44:21, Fabien COELHO a écrit :
> >> Here it is.
> >
> > The patch does not apply and git also whines about trailing space.
> > It needs a v3...
>
> The attachement here works for me.
> Could you be more precise about the issue?
>
> postgresql> git branch test master
>
On 2013-06-22 15:10:07 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Cédric Villemain
> wrote:
> > patch is in unified format and apply on HEAD.
> > patch contains documentation, however I believe 'AS IMPLICIT' is a
> > PostgreSQL
> > extension with special behavior and 'AS EXPLICI
Here it is.
The patch does not apply and git also whines about trailing space.
It needs a v3...
The attachement here works for me.
Could you be more precise about the issue?
postgresql> git branch test master
postgresql> git checkout test
Switched to branch 'test'
postgresql> patch -p1
Hello Fabien,
> > I flag it 'return with feedback', please update the patch so it builds.
> > Everything else is ok.
>
> Here it is.
The patch does not apply and git also whines about trailing space.
It needs a v3...
Please note that a community-agreed behavior on this patch is not yet
acquired
I flag it 'return with feedback', please update the patch so it builds.
Everything else is ok.
Here it is.
--
Fabien.diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml
index 29ea298..0ace996 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/
Hello Cédric,
So maybe it is possible to rephrase this piece:
- AS IMPLICIT is a PostgreSQL
- extension, too.
+ AS IMPLICIT and AS EXPLICIT are
+ a PostgreSQL extension, too.
Ok.
Back in 2012 Tom exposed arguments against it, or at least not a clear +1.
The patch add nothing but mor
Hello Robert,
I object to this patch. This patch a new keyword, EXPLICIT, for
reasons that are strictly cosmetic. Everything that you can do with
this patch can also be done without this patch. It is not a good idea
to slow down parsing of every SQL statement we have just so that
someone can
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Cédric Villemain
wrote:
> patch is in unified format and apply on HEAD.
> patch contains documentation, however I believe 'AS IMPLICIT' is a PostgreSQL
> extension with special behavior and 'AS EXPLICIT' respect the standard except
> that PostgreSQL adds only the e
16 matches
Mail list logo
