Re: describe special values in GUC descriptions more consistently
David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
From: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-02-13T22:50:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 3:18 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 04:10:53PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > > I presume it doesn't affect the actual output which just concatenates the > > fragments together but the source placement probably should be made > > consistent; the line containing the initial default value specification > > begins its own quoted fragment. The following violate that convention. > > Eh, most of the other descriptions with multiple sentences don't do that, > Apples and oranges. so IMHO there's no need for the special values to go in their own fragment. > The examples shown look sloppy, IMHO; standing out since the other 50, mostly due to the defaults being the only sentence in the gettext_noop, do line up nicely with either a number or "The empty string" as the lead. the worst offender is: - "lost before a connection is considered dead. A value of 0 uses the " - "system default."), + "lost before a connection is considered dead. 0 " + "means use the system default."), Even if the diff has logic to it - only remove stuff from the first line, only add stuff to the second, it isn't a big enough gain to offset leaving the source ugly, IMHO. David J.
Commits
-
Adjust auto_explain's GUC descriptions.
- e636da920028 18.0 landed
-
Describe special values in GUC descriptions more consistently.
- 977d865c36cc 18.0 landed