On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:24 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
>
> On 2021-Apr-26, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>
> > I agree that we can just be clear about the problem. Looks like the
> > majority of the errors "conflicting or redundant options" are for
> > redundant options. So, wherever "conflicting or redundant options"
> > exists: 1) change the message to "option \"%s\" specified more than
> > once" and remove parser_errposition if it's there because the option
> > name in the error message would give the info with which user can
> > point to the location
>
> Hmm, I would keep the parser_errposition() even if the option name is
> mentioned in the error message. There's no harm in being a little
> redundant, with both the option name and the error cursor showing the
> same thing.
>
> > 2) change the message to something like "option \"%s\" is conflicting
> > with option \"%s\"".
>
> Maybe, but since these would all be special cases, I think we'd need to
> discuss them individually. I would suggest that in order not to stall
> this patch, these cases should all stay as "redundant or conflicting
> options" -- that is, avoid any further change apart from exactly the
> thing you came here to change. You can submit a 0002 patch to change
> those other errors. That way, even if those changes end up rejected for
> whatever reason, you still got your 0001 done (which would change the
> bulk of "conflicting or redundant" error to the "option %s already
> specified" error). Some progress is better than none.
Thanks for the comments, please find the attached v3 patch which has
the change for the first part. I will make changes for 002 and post it
soon.
Thoughts?
Regards,
Vignesh
