On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:46 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Hm, that doesn't seem like a great improvement --- in particular, it
>> violates the style guideline that detail messages should be complete
>> sentences.
>>
>> I think the error text is all right as-is, really.
>
> I think I need to hit myself over the head with those guidelines
> repeatedly, because I think the *changed* messages are in violation of
> this, and need to be changed again...
>
Right, I was just applying the same DETAIL structure as was used
elsewhere in the patch. Tom's got a point about the complete
sentences though.
I still feel that the primary message is too long once the arguments
have been substituted in. How about just tweaking the DETAIL portion
so that it is a complete sentence?
Or perhaps the DETAIL portion would be more appropriate as a CONTEXT?
Cheers,
BJ
