On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 17:34 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > I'm not keen to explain to people how we broke their applications > just > > because we wanted to add new functionality AND avoid one > shift/reduce > > conflict in our SQL grammar. Avoiding changes to user code isn't > third > > on that list of three things I want, its first. > > I grow weary of discussions in which somebody argues that > consideration X always outweighs every other consideration. We're > doing engineering here, not theology, and there are always tradeoffs > to be made. In this case it's my opinion that a small syntax > adjustment is the best tradeoff.
I didn't say avoiding changes to user code *always* outweighs other considerations, it just does so in this case, for me. I too am doing engineering, not theology; our opinions differ in one area, that's all. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
