Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
> <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
>>> <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Thank you for your reviewing.
>>> >> I modified the patch and attached latest version patch(v7).
>>> >> Please have a look it.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Looks good to me. Attached patch (v8) just fix a tab indentation in
>>> > gram.y.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I had forgotten fix a tab indentation, sorry.
>>> Thank you for reviewing!
>>> It looks good to me too.
>>> Can this patch be marked as "Ready for Committer"?
>>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>
> Changed status to "Ready for Committer".

The patch adds new syntax like "REINDEX ... WITH VERBOSE", i.e., () is not
added after WITH clause. Did we reach the consensus about this syntax?
The last email from Robert just makes me think that () should be added
into the syntax.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao