| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, neverov(dot)max(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular |
| Date: | 2021-04-26 17:02:44 |
| Message-ID: | 2267469.1619456564@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 12:45:34PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I agree with Noah's opinion that we should stick to the historical
>> behavior in the interval I/O functions. There is not enough solidity
>> in the "this is grammatically wrong" argument to justify taking any
>> risk of application breakage, and it seems like there is some risk of
>> that there.
> Are you saying we should revert the patch and leave the plurals
> inconsistent in different places?
As far as the changes in datetime.c and interval.c are concerned,
yes. I don't care too much about what you did in fe-print.c,
although TBH that case should be unreachable shouldn't it?
When would PQntuples() return -1?
(I shy gently away from the fact that that fe-print.c code is
relentlessly untranslatable.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-04-26 17:06:16 | Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-04-26 16:54:35 | Re: BUG #16939: Plural interval for negative singular |