On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 15:55:54 -0500, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Guillaume Lelarge <guilla...@lelarge.info> writes: >> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:15:34 -0300, Alvaro Herrera >> <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >>> Excerpts from Susanne Ebrecht's message of sáb feb 18 18:11:54 -0300 >>>> I think that the constraint keyword "DEFAULT" should not be translated >>>> here. > >> I don't see why the modifiers shouldn't be translatable. It's not as if >> they were intended to be copied and pasted in a query. They are here to >> help the user understand the different modifiers in each column. > >> -1 to get rid of the translations. > > It seems to boil down to whether you think the "Modifiers" column > contains SQL, or a textual description of the column's properties. > I could go either way on that, but I notice that the existing code > is in the habit of truncating the default expression at 128 characters. > If we want to decide that we're printing real, copy-and-pastable SQL, > that seems like a bad idea. On the other hand, if we're printing > informational text, it's not an unreasonable thing. >
My first move was that truncating to 128 characters was bad idea. But in a terminal, you have a limited number of columns, so it would make sense. And, to me, it's a textual description. Not SQL. BTW, if it was SQL, when I do \d tablename, I should get the complete SQL query to create the table, not a description of the table definition. So, yeah, sure, the "Modifiers" column doesn't contain SQL, it's a description. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
