| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Replace l337sp34k in comments. |
| Date: | 2021-08-01 21:10:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20210801211016.mzplr4cjuinsuaei@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-07-31 12:15:34 +0300, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 11:22 AM Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
> > FWIW, my 2 cents.
> > I do not see much difference between up2date, up-to-date, up to date, current, recent, actual, last, newest, correct, fresh etc.
>
> +1.
> To me it seems normal to debate wording/terminology with new code
> comments, but that's about it. I find this zeal to change old code
> comments misguided. It's okay if they're clearly wrong or have typos.
> Anything else is just hypercorrection. And in any case there is a very
> real chance of making the overall situation worse rather than better.
> Probably in some subtle but important way.
Same here. I find them quite distracting, even.
It's one thing for such patches to target blindly obvious typos etc, but
they often also end up including less clear cut changes, which cost a
fair bit of time to review/judge.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-08-01 21:27:43 | Re: Replace l337sp34k in comments. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2021-08-01 21:07:22 | Re: slab allocator performance issues |