From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: language cleanups in code and docs |
Date: | 2020-06-17 16:27:03 |
Message-ID: | eba6478f-e171-4dba-ed5d-3644511d941d@pgmasters.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/17/20 12:08 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 4:15 PM Andrew Dunstan
> <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com <mailto:andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>>
>
> I'm not sure I like doing s/Black/Block/ here. It reads oddly. There are
> too many other uses of Block in the sources. Forbidden might be a better
> substitution, or Banned maybe. BanList is even less characters than
> BlackList.
>
> I'd be OK with either of those really -- I went with block because it
> was the easiest one :)
>
> Not sure the number of characters is the important part :) Banlist does
> make sense to me for other reasons though -- it's what it is, isn't it?
> It bans those oids from being used in the current session -- I don't
> think there's any struggle to "make that sentence work", which means
> that seems like the relevant term.
I've seen also seen allowList/denyList as an alternative. I do agree
that blockList is a bit confusing since we often use block in a very
different context.
> I do think it's worth doing -- it's a small round of changes, and it
> doesn't change anything user-exposed, so the cost for us is basically zero.
+1
Regards,
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-17 16:27:48 | Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY |
Previous Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2020-06-17 16:15:25 | Re: language cleanups in code and docs |