From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
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: | 2021-07-31 15:04:40 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYZuCofHMnzUTL3PGaKkMPWEjiSZU9Zw-Hkbd_bkvZCuQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday, July 31, 2021, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> 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.
>
Maybe in general I would agree but I agree that this warrants an
exception. While maybe not explicitly stated the use of up2date as a term
is against the de-facto style guide for our project and should be corrected
regardless of how long it took to discover the violation. We fix other
unimportant but obvious typos all the time and this is no different. We
don’t ask people to police this but we also don’t turn down well-written
patches.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-07-31 16:10:44 | Re: archive status ".ready" files may be created too early |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-07-31 12:30:13 | Re: Detecting File Damage & Inconsistencies |