Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Current enums patch

From: Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Current enums patch
Date: 2007-03-31 23:26:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
 > Unless someone objects, I'll change this and also revert to the
 > enumlabel name that seems to have been used originally (it was still
 > used in the docs).  It seems more readable somehow (I guess it's the
 > lack of either ascenders or descenders in "enumname").

The name/text thing is discussed downthread. I actually started out 
calling the field the name and changed it to the label, but perhaps I 
only did that in the docs. It was probably while I was writing the docs 
that I realized that name could refer to the enum type name or the value 
name, which was confusing, but "value name" was kinda cumbersome, hence 
"label". Change it over with my blessing.



In response to


pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2007-03-31 23:36:21
Subject: Re: Macros for typtype (was Re: Arrays of Complex Types)
Previous:From: Tom DunstanDate: 2007-03-31 23:18:31
Subject: Re: Current enums patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group