On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 3:52 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> On 2019-Aug-07, Amit Langote wrote:
>
> > If we're reducing the message string to occur only once in the source
> > code, can we maybe write it to be more informative? I wonder if users
> > aren't normally supposed to see this message?
>
>
On 2019-Sep-04, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 3:52 AM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2019-Aug-07, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> > > If we're reducing the message string to occur only once in the source
> > > code, can we maybe write it to be more informative? I wonder if users
>
On 2019-Aug-07, Amit Langote wrote:
> If we're reducing the message string to occur only once in the source
> code, can we maybe write it to be more informative? I wonder if users
> aren't normally supposed to see this message?
Grepping for the messages given to convert_tuples_by_position yields
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 7:47 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Hello, here's a pretty trivial cleanup.
>
> Currently, you have to pass the errmsg text to convert_tuples_by_name
> and convert_tuples_by_position that's going to be raised if the tuple
> descriptors don't match. In the latter's case that m
Hello, here's a pretty trivial cleanup.
Currently, you have to pass the errmsg text to convert_tuples_by_name
and convert_tuples_by_position that's going to be raised if the tuple
descriptors don't match. In the latter's case that makes sense, as each
case is pretty specific and tailored messages
