Thread: pgsql-server/ oc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml rc/interf ...

CVSROOT:    /cvsroot
Module name:    pgsql-server
Changes by:    tgl@svr1.postgresql.org    03/10/04 18:05:22

Modified files:
    doc/src/sgml   : libpq.sgml
    src/interfaces/libpq: fe-exec.c

Log message:
    Document the always-true-but-previously-undocumented fact that PQfnumber()
    will downcase the supplied field name unless it is double-quoted.  Also,
    upgrade the routine's handling of double quotes to match the backend,
    in particular support doubled double quotes within quoted identifiers.
    Per pgsql-interfaces discussion a couple weeks ago.

Tom Lane writes:

>     Document the always-true-but-previously-undocumented fact that PQfnumber()
>     will downcase the supplied field name unless it is double-quoted.  Also,
>     upgrade the routine's handling of double quotes to match the backend,
>     in particular support doubled double quotes within quoted identifiers.

Isn't that an instance of the same "buggy" behavior that the database name
provided to libpq once exhibited, i.e., it should be removed?

>     Per pgsql-interfaces discussion a couple weeks ago.

Could I request that technical decisions that are reached somewhere in the
depth of threads on user-level mailing lists are posted to hackers before
they are applied?

--
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Document the always-true-but-previously-undocumented fact that PQfnumber()
>> will downcase the supplied field name unless it is double-quoted.  Also,
>> upgrade the routine's handling of double quotes to match the backend,
>> in particular support doubled double quotes within quoted identifiers.

> Isn't that an instance of the same "buggy" behavior that the database name
> provided to libpq once exhibited, i.e., it should be removed?

Well, we can re-discuss it if you like.  I'd have preferred that answer
myself, but it didn't seem to be the winner in the pg-interfaces discussion.


>> Per pgsql-interfaces discussion a couple weeks ago.

> Could I request that technical decisions that are reached somewhere in the
> depth of threads on user-level mailing lists are posted to hackers before
> they are applied?

As far as I'm concerned, pgsql-interfaces is an appropriate and
sufficiently authoritative discussion forum for issues that only affect
the interface libraries and not the backend.  If we aren't willing to
delegate, we might as well eliminate all the other lists and just have
pgsql-hackers.

            regards, tom lane