On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:28:21PM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>
> > The existing patch's behavior is that "the rightmost switch wins",
> > ie, if an object's name matches more than one pattern then it is
> > included or excluded according to the rightmost switch it matches.
> > This is, erm, poorly documented, but it seems like useful behavior
> > so I don't have an objection myself.
>
> I don't know, it sounds like it's the source of the confusion you
> identify later.
>
> My first thought is that the rule should be to apply all the
> inclusion switches (implicitly including everything if there are
> none), then apply all the exclusion switches.
+1 :)
Order-dependent switches are a giant foot gun.
Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!
