On 07/09/2013 01:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Where are we with this patch? Fabien, are you going to submit an
updated version which addresses the objections, or should I mark it
Returned With Feedback?
There is no need for an updated patch. I addressed the objections with
words, not
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 07/09/2013 01:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Where are we with this patch? Fabien, are you going to submit an
updated version which addresses the objections, or should I mark it
Returned With Feedback?
There is no need for an updated patch. I addressed
On 07/16/2013 03:12 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 07/09/2013 01:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Where are we with this patch? Fabien, are you going to submit an
updated version which addresses the objections, or should I mark it
Returned With Feedback?
There is
Generally speaking, I agree with Robert's objection. The patch in
itself adds only one unnecessary keyword, which probably wouldn't be
noticeable, but the argument for it implies that we should be willing
to add a lot more equally-unnecessary keywords, which I'm not. gram.o
is already
Hello Josh,
Generally speaking, I agree with Robert's objection. The patch in
itself adds only one unnecessary keyword, which probably wouldn't be
noticeable, but the argument for it implies that we should be willing
to add a lot more equally-unnecessary keywords, which I'm not. gram.o
is
On 06/24/2013 06:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
What about simply not using a keyword at that location at all? Something
like the attached hack?
Generally speaking, I agree with Robert's objection. The patch in
itself adds only one unnecessary keyword,
Hello Fabien,
I flag it 'return with feedback', please update the patch so it builds.
Everything else is ok.
Here it is.
The patch does not apply and git also whines about trailing space.
It needs a v3...
Please note that a community-agreed behavior on this patch is not yet
acquired, you
Here it is.
The patch does not apply and git also whines about trailing space.
It needs a v3...
The attachement here works for me.
Could you be more precise about the issue?
postgresql git branch test master
postgresql git checkout test
Switched to branch 'test'
postgresql patch -p1
On 2013-06-22 15:10:07 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Cédric Villemain
ced...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
patch is in unified format and apply on HEAD.
patch contains documentation, however I believe 'AS IMPLICIT' is a
PostgreSQL
extension with special behavior
Le lundi 24 juin 2013 11:44:21, Fabien COELHO a écrit :
Here it is.
The patch does not apply and git also whines about trailing space.
It needs a v3...
The attachement here works for me.
Could you be more precise about the issue?
postgresql git branch test master
postgresql
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
What about simply not using a keyword at that location at all? Something
like the attached hack?
Hack is much too polite a word for that. This will for example fail
to respect the difference between quoted and unquoted words. If the
argument for
On 2013-06-24 09:55:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
What about simply not using a keyword at that location at all? Something
like the attached hack?
Hack is much too polite a word for that. This will for example fail
to respect the difference
Le lundi 17 juin 2013 00:02:21, Fabien COELHO a écrit :
What activity would you expect?
A patch which applies cleanly to git HEAD. This one doesn't for me,
although I'm not really sure why, I don't see any obvious conflicts.
Please find attached a freshly generated patch against
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Cédric Villemain
ced...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
patch is in unified format and apply on HEAD.
patch contains documentation, however I believe 'AS IMPLICIT' is a PostgreSQL
extension with special behavior and 'AS EXPLICIT' respect the standard except
that
Hello Robert,
I object to this patch. This patch a new keyword, EXPLICIT, for
reasons that are strictly cosmetic. Everything that you can do with
this patch can also be done without this patch. It is not a good idea
to slow down parsing of every SQL statement we have just so that
someone
Hello Cédric,
So maybe it is possible to rephrase this piece:
- literalAS IMPLICIT/ is a productnamePostgreSQL/productname
- extension, too.
+ literalAS IMPLICIT/ and literalAS EXPLICIT/ are
+ a productnamePostgreSQL/productname extension, too.
Ok.
Back in 2012 Tom exposed
I flag it 'return with feedback', please update the patch so it builds.
Everything else is ok.
Here it is.
--
Fabien.diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml
index 29ea298..0ace996 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml
+++
Hi,
I saw you added this 2-year old thread to the 2013-06 commitfest, but I
don't see any new activity. Huh?
On 28.05.2011 00:48, Fabien COELHO wrote:
From a language definition perspective, it is helpful to have a name for
every case instead of an implicit fallback, without any word to
Hello,
I saw you added this 2-year old thread to the 2013-06 commitfest, but I don't
see any new activity. Huh?
What activity would you expect? I sent the patch 2 years ago on the list,
and now that I figured out that there is a submitted patch list open for
consideration I added the
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
Hello,
I saw you added this 2-year old thread to the 2013-06 commitfest, but I
don't see any new activity. Huh?
What activity would you expect?
A patch which applies cleanly to git HEAD. This one doesn't for
What activity would you expect?
A patch which applies cleanly to git HEAD. This one doesn't for me,
although I'm not really sure why, I don't see any obvious conflicts.
Please find attached a freshly generated patch against current master.
--
Fabien.diff --git
On 18 June 2011 09:49, Brendan Jurd dire...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Fabien,
I'm taking a look at this patch for the commitfest. On first reading
of the patch, it looked pretty sensible to me, but I had some trouble
applying it to HEAD:
error: patch failed: doc/src/sgml/ref/create_cast.sgml:20
On 22 May 2011 07:27, Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr wrote:
Hello Tom,
Add AS EXPLICIT to CREATE CAST This gives a name to the default case
of CREATE CAST, which creates a cast which must be explicitely invoked.
I'm not sure this is a good idea. The CREATE CAST syntax is in the SQL
From a language definition perspective, it is helpful to have a name for
every case instead of an implicit fallback, without any word to describe
it. See for instance CREATE USER CREATEDB/NOCREATEDB or CREATE RULE ...
DO ALSO/INSTEAD for similar occurences of naming default cases.
Oddly
On lör, 2011-05-21 at 15:46 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
Hello,
Please find attached a minor stylish patch. It compiles and the update
test cases work for me.
Description:
Add AS EXPLICIT to CREATE CAST
This gives a name to the default case of CREATE CAST, which creates a
cast
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On lör, 2011-05-21 at 15:46 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
From a language definition perspective, it is helpful to have a name for
every case instead of an implicit fallback, without any word to describe
it. See for instance CREATE USER
Hello,
Please find attached a minor stylish patch. It compiles and the update
test cases work for me.
Description:
Add AS EXPLICIT to CREATE CAST
This gives a name to the default case of CREATE CAST, which creates a
cast which must be explicitely invoked.
From a language definition
Fabien COELHO coe...@cri.ensmp.fr writes:
Description:
Add AS EXPLICIT to CREATE CAST
This gives a name to the default case of CREATE CAST, which creates a
cast which must be explicitely invoked.
I'm not sure this is a good idea. The CREATE CAST syntax is in the SQL
standard, and this isn't
Hello Tom,
Add AS EXPLICIT to CREATE CAST This gives a name to the default
case of CREATE CAST, which creates a cast which must be explicitely
invoked.
I'm not sure this is a good idea. The CREATE CAST syntax is in the SQL
standard, and this isn't it. Now I realize that we've extended
29 matches
Mail list logo
