Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
> Actually that's me who have lost it.
Yeah, I realized today when I saw your reply to Nikita. I didn't
realize it was him submitting a new version of the patch.
> The code with oxford comma would be a
> bit more complicated. We should put such coma when we have 3+ items and do not
> put it when we have 2.
>
> Does it worth it?
>
> As I've read oxford using of comma is not mandatory and used to avoid
> ambiguity.
> "XXX, YYY and ZZZ" can be read as "XXX, YYY, ZZZ" or as "XXX, (YYY and ZZZ)".
> oxford comma is used to make sure that YYY and ZZZ are separate items of the
> list, not an expression inside one item.
>
> But here we hardly have such ambiguity.
Gracious goodness -- the stuff these Brits come up with!
> So I'll ask again, do you really think it worth it?
I'm not qualified to answer this question.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
