> This is fixed now, but I don't suppose you want dropdb's default behaviour
> to be along those same lines. I'd have a serious problem with that, even
> though old destroydb used to do that.
Hmm, I think I see a correct answer in the way you phrased the
question :)
You are right, the downside to a default argument for dropdb would
argue strongly for supplying *no* default argument. For "create" kinds
of things, the downside is minimal, and the convenience is high.
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California
