Re: REINDEX VERBOSE unknown option

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 11:37:04AM +0000, Geoff Winkless wrote:
> It's bad enough that you have the inconsistency that REINDEX VERBOSE
> requires parentheses while the more recent REINDEX CONCURRENTLY does
> not (presumably to match the syntax of CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY),
> without insisting that the user parse the difference between { and (
> in the manual (not the easiest difference to scan) before they can use
> the command.

The first implementations of REINDEX CONCURRENTLY used the existing
grammar. There was also a discussion when the feature was close to
commit about exactly that and I preferred the parenthesis option.
Who won t the end? Consistency with the existing grammar for
CREATE/DROP INDEX here.

>> How about this?
>>
>> * Terminals (stuff that has to be typed as shown) in bold.
>>
>> * Non-Terminals (stuff which has to be replaced) in italic.
>>
>> * Meta-characters ([, ], |, ...) in regular type.
>
> Even if you do that you're still requiring the user to parse syntax
> according to esoteric rules. I'm not sure that changing the rules
> helps that much.

This does not concern only the page for REINDEX. Perhaps this could
be improved, but I am not sure how and particularly if changing it is
worth it as many people are used to the existing way of presenting the
commands synopsis as well.
--
Michael