On 2025-May-12, Fujii Masao wrote: > I have no objection to this commit. However, I had assumed we would > wait to commit changes like this - which aren't bug fixes or > v18-related oversights - until master becomes the development branch > for v19. Maybe I'm missing something..
Yeah, fair question. We got new syntax to add NOT NULL constraints, and this adds tab-completion for that. It does, in addition, add tab-completion for CHECK constraints and for the CONSTRAINT keyword, which is much older syntax. So I guess you could argue that it would have been okay to add the NOT NULL one (it could be considered an open item), but not the the other two because they're instead a "new feature". But that helps nobody, because we would be offering _some_ options in a command but not all possible ones, which I think is even worse because it'd be misleading. Consider the other patch I sent later. It adds tab-completion coverage for the new NOT NULL syntax in ALTER TABLE, so it should be fair game for 18, shouldn't it? Again: it'd be misleading not to tab-complete that syntax, because it would confuse people into failing to realize that that syntax exists, if they see other options but not that one. As for whether your proposed tab-completion improvements are acceptable to be included now, I guess it's all subjective on what exactly they are. -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "I think my standards have lowered enough that now I think 'good design' is when the page doesn't irritate the living f*ck out of me." (JWZ)
