Re: [HACKERS] "Adding missing from clause" (replacement)

I have applied the following patch, which does make a few adjustments.

I called the variable add_missing_from, rather than
enable_implicit_from. The former seemed clearer.

I also enhanced the documentation for the item.

I added comments for the End-of-list records.

Does someone want to make an argument that this variable should default
to false rather than true, for standards compliance?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
> On Thu, 1 May 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > "Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > > * Add enable_implicited_join GUC, defaulting to true. Emit notice if
> > > enabled, throw error if disabled when adding implicit RTE.
> >
> > I'd call it "enable_implicit_from", I think, but otherwise this seems
> > reasonable...
>
> Fair enough, I'm not particularly sold on my choice so here's a replacement
> patch with the GUC name changed. If there's a problem it'll probably be because
> I edited the patch and not the source.
>
> Log:
>
> * Add enable_implicit_from GUC, defaulting to true. Emit notice if
> enabled, throw error if disabled when adding implicit RTE.
>
>
> --
> Nigel J. Andrews
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073