From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Refer to a TOKEN_USER payload as a "token user, " not as a "user |
Date: | 2016-04-02 03:07:01 |
Message-ID: | 9653.1459566421@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Noah Misch (noah(at)leadboat(dot)com) wrote:
>> I see some advantages of writing "TokenUser", as you propose. However, our
>> error style guide says "Avoid mentioning called function names, either;
>> instead say what the code was trying to do." Mentioning an enumerator name is
>> morally similar to mentioning a function name.
> That's a fair point, but it doesn't mean we should use a different
> spelling for the enumerator name to avoid that piece of the policy. I
> certianly don't see "token user" as saying "what the code was trying to
> do" in this case.
FWIW, "token user" conveys entirely inappropriate, politically incorrect
connotations to me ;-). I don't have any great suggestions on what to use
instead, but I share Stephen's unhappiness with the wording as-committed.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2016-04-02 10:54:35 | pgsql: Fixes in bloom contrib module |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-04-02 02:51:13 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Refer to a TOKEN_USER payload as a "token user, " not as a "user |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-04-02 05:16:48 | Re: IF (NOT) EXISTS in psql-completion |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-04-02 02:51:13 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Refer to a TOKEN_USER payload as a "token user, " not as a "user |