Re: GUC names in messages

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 10:04:35AM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 8:53 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>> Yeah. Also, these could be changed to have the GUC name outside the
>> message proper, which would reduce the total number of messages. (But
>> care must be given to the word "the" there.)
>
> I had posted something similar a few posts back [1], but it just
> caused more questions unrelated to GUC name quotes so I abandoned that
> temporarily.

Yes, I kind of agree to let that out of the picture for the moment.
It would be good to reduce the translation chunks.

> So for now, I hope this thread can be only about quotes on GUC names,
> otherwise, I thought it may become stuck debating dozens of individual
> messages. Certainly later, or in another thread, we can revisit all
> messages again to try to identify/extract any "common" ones.

-HINT: Perhaps you need a different "datestyle" setting.
+HINT: Perhaps you need a different DateStyle setting.

Is the change for "datestyle" really required? It does not betray the
GUC quoting policy added by 0001.

>> I think we could leave these improvements for a second round. They
>> don't need to hold back the improvement we already have.
>
> I tried something for this already but kept it in a separate patch. See v2-0003

+ if (*p == '_')
+ underscore = true;

Is there a reason why we don't just use islower() or is that just to
get something entirely local independent? I am not sure that it needs
to be that complicated. We should just check that all the characters
are lower-case and apply quotes.
--
Michael