Hello Pavel and Tomas, On Tue, March 20, 2018 12:36 am, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2018-03-19 21:47 GMT+01:00 Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm looking at the updated patch (plpgsql-extra-check-180316.patch), and >> this time it applies and builds OK. The one thing I noticed is that the >> documentation still uses the old wording for strict_multi_assignement: >> >> WARNING: Number of evaluated fields does not match expected. >> HINT: strict_multi_assignement check of extra_warnings is active. >> WARNING: Number of evaluated fields does not match expected. >> HINT: strict_multi_assignement check of extra_warnings is active. >> >> This was reworded to "Number of source and target fields in assignment >> does not match." >>
I believe the correct wording should be:
"Number of source and target fields in assignment do not match."
ecause comparing one number to the other means "the number A and B _do_ not match", not "the number A does not match number B".
Also there is an inconsistent quoting here:
+ <para> + Setting <varname>plpgsql.extra_warnings</varname>, or + <varname>plpgsql.extra_errors</varname>, as appropriate, to <literal>all</literal>
no quotes for 'all'.
+ is encouraged in development and/or testing environments. + </para> + + <para> + These additional checks are enabled through the configuration variables + <varname>plpgsql.extra_warnings</varname> for warnings and + <varname>plpgsql.extra_errors</varname> for errors. Both can be set either to + a comma-separated list of checks, <literal>"none"</literal> or + <literal>"all"</literal>.
quotes here around '"all"'. I think it should be one or the other in both cases.
Also:
+ Currently + the list of available checks includes only one:
