Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Smith
Subject Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro?
Date
Msg-id CAHut+Pt2L5jAS2qXDENa2-+0dX2gH+kFWQbfkE3uzCoSRrjGFA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro?  (Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>)
Responses Re: Redundant/mis-use of _(x) gettext macro?
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 2:44 AM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
>
> On 2026-Apr-24, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> > OK. Including the comma within a larger translated string seems like a
> > better idea.
> [...]
> > Also, why did you choose to implement `last` versus `first` logic?
> > e.g. How about this?
>
> In the end I decided to go with the flow and changed to use "first"
> logic rather than "last".  I also figured that we should change the
> other two places you pointed out at the start of the thread to use the
> same coding style.  Since this is mostly cosmetic, I don't feel
> compelled to back-patch it, and pushed only to master.
>

Thanks for pushing!

> Another place I noticed while looking this over is psql's
> describeOneTableDetails(), per the attached patch.  It's essentially
> more of the same, but arguably different enough that I judged it
> warranted posting before pushing.
>

This additional patch LGTM.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: A trivial fix on a comment in pgstat_assoc_relation()
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: CI failure: postgres_fdw_get_connections