| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: s/LABEL/VALUE/ for ENUMs |
| Date: | 2010-11-23 00:46:34 |
| Message-ID: | 21845.1290473194@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 11/22/2010 06:57 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Maybe instead of "textual label", we should say "name"? But that
>> doesn't seem like quite le mot juste either. "label" is actually a
>> pretty good word for the text representation of an enum value.
> Oh my boots and buttons. I think we're splitting some very fine hairs
> here. A few weeks back you were telling us that label wasn't a very good
> word and shouldn't be sanctified in the SQL.
It isn't a very good word for the abstract value, IMO, but the text
representation is a different concept.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-11-23 00:48:17 | Re: s/LABEL/VALUE/ for ENUMs |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-11-23 00:38:40 | Re: s/LABEL/VALUE/ for ENUMs |