On 24/06/2023 23:52, Steve Chavez wrote:
On Tue, 16 May 2023 at 07:49, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com
<mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 9:37 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
<mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:
> Steve Chavez <st...@supabase.io <mailto:st...@supabase.io>> writes:
> > I found "..." confusing in some comments, so this patch changes
it to
> > "cstring". Which seems to be the intention after all.
>
> Those comments are Berkeley-era, making them probably a decade older
> than the "cstring" pseudotype (invented in b663f3443). Perhaps what
> you suggest is an improvement, but I'm not sure that appealing to
> original intent can make the case.
FWIW, it does seem like an improvement to me.
Tom, could we apply this patch since Robert agrees it's an improvement?
Looking around at other input/output functions, we're not very
consistent, there are many variants of "converts string to [datatype]",
"converts C string to [datatype]", and "input routine for [datatype]".
They are all fine, even though they're inconsistent. Doesn't seem worth
the code churn to change them.
Anyway, I agree this patch is an improvement, so applied. Thanks!
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
