On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Jan Przemysław Wójcik
<jan.przemyslaw.wojcik@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm afraid that creating a function that implements quite different
> algorithms depending on a global parameter seems very hacky and would lead
> to misunderstandings. I do understand the need of backward compatibility,
> but I'd opt for the lesser evil. Perhaps a good idea would be to change the
> name to 'substring_similarity()' and introduce the new function
> 'word_similarity()' later, for example in the next major version release.
That breaks things for everybody using word_similarity() currently.
If the previous discussion of this topic concluded that
word_similarity() was an OK name despite being a slight misnomer, I
don't think we should change our mind now. Instead the new function
can be called something which makes the difference clear, e.g.
strict_word_similarity(), and the old function can remain as it is.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
