Arthur Zakirov <zaar...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2020/01/23 7:11, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Closer examination shows that the "max" argument is pretty bogus as
>> well. It doesn't do anything except confuse the reader, because there
>> are no cases where the value passed is less than the maximum array entry
>> length, so it never acts to change seq_search's behavior. So we should
>> just drop that behavior from seq_search, too, and redefine "max" as
>> having no purpose except to specify how much of the string to show in
>> error messages. There's still a question of what that should be for
>> non-English cases, but at least we now have a clear idea of what we
>> need the value to do.
> Shouldn't we just show all remaining string instead of truncating it?
That would avoid a bunch of arbitrary decisions, for sure.
Anybody have an objection?
regards, tom lane
