"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> I don't see it as unreasonable to claim the lack of documentation regarding
> known alternative representations that could be accepted as input is a
> bug. The actual report isn't even asking for us to implement acceptance of
> those formats, just make it clear when someone gets that error and checks
> the docs that the error is valid.
Yeah. I'm disinclined to loosen the input syntax rules, but the docs
could stand improvement I think. Particularly since there are no
concrete examples in
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/datatype-net-types.html#DATATYPE-INET
but there are in the following section about CIDR --- and that type
*does* allow some forms of abbreviation. It would not be unreasonable
to assume that INET does too.
regards, tom lane
