Re: tablecmds: clarify recurse vs recusing

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tablecmds: clarify recurse vs recusing
Date: 2026-01-19 15:50:01
Message-ID: ba7cba89-b76f-4d8b-a5cd-8ff1fe67bec4@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 19.01.26 08:14, Chao Li wrote:
> Many ALTER TABLE-related functions take two boolean parameters,
> "recurse" and "recursing", whose names are easy to confuse.

I'm not bothered by this.

> To reduce this confusion, I’m proposing to rename "recurse" to
> "no_only", which more directly reflects its meaning.

This seems worse. Especially since no_only is almost a double negative.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2026-01-19 16:02:54 Re: tablecmds: clarify recurse vs recusing
Previous Message Xuneng Zhou 2026-01-19 15:35:28 Re: Add WALRCV_CONNECTING state to walreceiver